Greedy, heartless Wal-Mart customers say no to higher prices

[Vteckidd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLr5oWfoWRY

Greedy, heartless Wal-Mart customers say no to higher prices | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/18/greedy-heartless-wal-mart-customers-say-no-to-higher-prices/)

[.blank cd]

It's hilarious that the very first guy he interviewed made him look like a jackass.

Peter Schiff content warning for anyone else about to click it. Not that anyone else here is seekers of accurate and unbiased information anyway.

[Vteckidd]

Not sure if you watched the right video.

Its obviously a satire, but the point is you would have to raise prices to pay higher wages, and the public doesnt support that.

you cant just raise wages and expect it to have zero effect on the rest of the economy and jobs. The point he makes is 100% accurate

[.blank cd]

Not sure if you watched the right video.

Its obviously a satire Its wasnt funny (at least, in the way he intended it to be), nor does he raise a valid point


but the point is you would have to raise prices to pay higher wages, and the public doesnt support that.

you cant just raise wages and expect it to have zero effect on the rest of the economy and jobs. The point he makes is 100% accurate

Maybe you missed the point of the minimum wage discussion.

[Vteckidd]

In all honesty i was hoping you wouldnt pop in here because these little economic banters are just boring.

Its hard to have you in other threads when you refuse to answer questions in others.

Tell me how you raise minimum wage + $8/hr and everything else in the economy stays the same.



The point of this is to just show you that people shop at Walmart for a reason, low prices. When you increase the costs of doing business(wages), you raise prices. This is simple ECON, stuff you just dont understand. But, guys like you just think the Evil Walmart can just write the check and take it out of their "profit" to be "nice guys"

Too bad business doesnt work that way

[.blank cd]

In all honesty i was hoping you wouldnt pop in here because these little economic banters are just boring.

Its hard to have you in other threads when you refuse to answer questions in others.I understand. It's difficult to have an economic banter with someone who actually knows economics. I wouldn't want to banter with me either.


Tell me how you raise minimum wage + $8/hr and everything else in the economy stays the same.
Could you tell me the last time the baseline effectively doubled overnight in recent history?

Take your time.

In the meantime, could there be another reason people are asking for $15?


The point of this is to just show you that people shop at Walmart for a reason, low prices. When you increase the costs of doing business(wages)"

And the very first person he approached was supportive of a drastic minimum wage hike, and was almost willing to donate before he started with the invasive questions.

He makes a really shitty comedian and economist. He should probably stick to his day job and stop offering Econ opinions and terrible comedy.

Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert have the political satire/comedy thing covered.

[.blank cd]

I've compiled a list of emotional arguments you movement conservatives can use against me to tear my arguments down piece by piece. You can chose from, but are not limited to:

"[insert co. here]employees doesn't deserve it"

"Mcdonalds can't even get my order right"

"Why should we pay them as much as someone with [insert graduate degree here]"

And finally, "I don't even make $15 an hour"

[BanginJimmy]

Blank, when you pay the lowest segment of the population 'X' dollars, every segment above them expects a percentage more than they do for their work. If a cashier's wages double to $15, the hourly manager is well within reason to expect $30. If you are making $30 as a shift manager at McDonald's, this causes a price increase.

If I could make $30/hr at McDonald's, why should I spend my days working on multi-million dollar airplanes for $30? To entice qualified workers, my employer is forced to raise wages 25% to prevent skills loss, they have to charge their customers 25% more for their products.

If I am making 25% more, the engineers are going to expect that also. If the engineers are getting that pay hike, so are the managers. If the managers are getting that pay hike, so are the executives.


What does all this turn into? Massive inflation and price increases across the board thereby reducing buying power right back to where it is today.


Do I expect you to understand all this? Not a chance. You can only see things in a vacuum. In your mind, if something happens to A, B, C, and D are not affected because nothing directly happened to them.

[Sinfix_15]

I'd love to support walmart workers making higher wages!...


Where can i donate to their college funds?



LOL>>>> "Where's some Obama voters? theyre sure to want to spend more money"



Funny that blank jumped on this instantly when it is so OBVIOUSLY a joke.

[.blank cd]

Blank, when you pay the lowest segment of the population 'X' dollars, every segment above them expects a percentage more than they do for their work.You mean, they would feel 'entitled', correct?


If I could make $30/hr at McDonald's, why should I spend my days working on multi-million dollar airplanes for $30? To entice qualified workers, my employer is forced to raise wages 25% to prevent skills loss, they have to charge their customers 25% more for their products.Easy there. That slope is pretty slippery


Do I expect you to understand all this? Not a chance. You can only see things in a vacuum. In your mind, if something happens to A, B, C, and D are not affected because nothing directly happened to them.I understand what you're saying, but slippery slopes and hyperbole are pretty poor ways to get your point across.

Wanna pick another argument?

[Sinfix_15]

I've compiled a list of emotional arguments you movement conservatives can use against me to tear my arguments down piece by piece. You can chose from, but are not limited to:

"[insert co. here]employees doesn't deserve it"

"Mcdonalds can't even get my order right"

"Why should we pay them as much as someone with [insert graduate degree here]"

And finally, "I don't even make $15 an hour"

Someone i know who isnt me and doesnt work where i work oversees a large group of people who make less than $15/hr, this person, who isnt me and doesnt work where i work, told me in confidence that those people absolutely did not deserve to make $15/hr

[.blank cd]

Someone i know who isnt me and doesnt work where i work oversees a large group of people who make less than $15/hr, this person, who isnt me and doesnt work where i work, told me in confidence that those people absolutely did not deserve to make $15/hr

X employees doesn't deserve it

[Sinfix_15]

X employees doesn't deserve itI've been a manager at walmart............ there's people who cant read working there. I'm serious..... that's not a joke.

Your skills dictate your salary.... unfortunately... stocking shelves is not a super valuable skill.

[.blank cd]

I've been a manager at walmart............ there's people who cant read working there. I'm serious..... that's not a joke.

Your skills dictate your salary.... unfortunately... stocking shelves is not a super valuable skill.

Ok. So you want to use the skill argument.

We can probably agree stocking shelves at Walmart and cashiering at McDonalds requires little skill, and is a job that hasn't changed much in recent history. Put this box on that shelf/take customers money and give correct change.

So if the job remains the same, why have we raised minimum wage at all since the 30s? Should minimum wage workers still make 30 cents an hour for doing the same task they did 80 years ago?

[Sinfix_15]

Ok. So you want to use the skill argument.

We can probably agree stocking shelves at Walmart and cashiering at McDonalds requires little skill, and is a job that hasn't changed much in recent history. Put this box on that shelf/take customers money and give correct change.

So if the job remains the same, why have we raised minimum wage at all since the 30s? Should minimum wage workers still make 30 cents an hour for doing the same task they did 80 years ago?

Those arguments are not interlinked with each other. The minimum wage is what it is and Walmart compensates their employees based around those perimeters. If the minimum wage became $50/hr tomorrow, then everyone else would start making $150/hr and the cost of a gallon of milk would go up to $35, accomplishing nothing.

So, separate the minimum wage debate from what employers actually pay their employees. Then understand that skill decides your salary, regardless of what the minimum wage is.

If i create a company selling post it note greeting cards and it becomes a multi billion dollar industry, i should still be able to pay people a fair wage for their ability to sign a post it note, regardless of what my profit margin is. Business owners reap the benefits of profit margins.... not burger flippers or shelf fillers.

[.blank cd]

Those arguments are not interlinked with each other. The minimum wage is what it is and Walmart compensates their employees based around those perimeters.

So, separate the minimum wage debate from what employers actually pay their employees. Then understand that skill decides your salary, regardless of what the minimum wage is.

If i create a company selling post it note greeting cards and it becomes a multi billion dollar industry, i should still be able to pay people a fair wage for their ability to sign a post it note, regardless of what my profit margin is. Business owners reap the benefits of profit margins.... not burger flippers or shelf fillers.

What in the fuck are you talking about now? Separate the minimum wage debate from what they pay their employees? Are you high?

[Sinfix_15]

What in the fuck are you talking about now? Separate the minimum wage debate from what they pay their employees? Are you high?

Are you? It's not an employer's obligation to pay you 1 penny over min wage, whatever min wage may be. They are two different topics. Are you really this uneducated?

[-EnVus-]

All I can say is if they are not happy with what they earn I know many who would love it lol
Like Batman said at the end of the video "Nobody wants higher prices"

[Vteckidd]

Lol its funny just to see blank squirm

Why do they deserve $15/hr? Why not $20?30?40?

What makes them pick that number blank?

[.blank cd]

Lol its funny just to see blank squirm

Why do they deserve $15/hr? Why not $20?30?40?

What makes them pick that number blank?

Who is squirming?

Why not $10? $5? $1?

Why does it matter to what they deserve? It doesn't to anyone else, and it never has. The same defeatist arguments were used to oppose raising the minimum wage to $7.25, to $5.25, to $4.75, to $3. You'd figure by now, opposers would come up with some new material since it hasn't worked so far. Lol.

"Why not raise it to $30, $50, $100/hr" - slippery slope, defeated.

"They don't deserve it" - false

"Blah blah blah skill level" - false

"Worldwide global inflation recession crash" - false

"Minimum wage is separate from what employers pay employees" - first time I've heard that one, dunno what that non-sensical babble has to do with what we're talking about here

There's a reason why I don't use emotional arguments and slippery slope fallacies. I know enough to avoid them. Frankly it's getting old pointing out when the rest of this forum uses them. Figured one would learn by the 2nd or 3rd time. Not by the 174th.

[Sinfix_15]

Theyre not protesting the government to raise the min wage..... theyre protesting their employers. Your company is legally obligated to pay you a min wage and that's it. It doesnt matter if the company makes trillions..... theyre legally obligated to pay you min wage and not a penny more.

The min wage is what it is..... Anything you make above that mark is attributed to how valuable your skills are.


Minimum wage is a completely different topic. The government sets the min wage....... it's not mcdonalds or walmarts job to offer you a living or make sure your bills are paid. If you cant make a living working at mcdonalds..... get a roommate, go back to school, live in an apartment, dont have kids, learn to like the taste of ramen noodles..... really dont give a fuck, it's your problem.


Funny how blank keeps saying everyone is being emotional... when he's the one who always plays the role of captain save a hoe for every freeloading welfare abusing pot head.

[.blank cd]

Theyre not protesting the government to raise the min wage....Uhh, yes. The whole conversation is about minimum wage.

[Vteckidd]

Who is squirming?

Why not $10? $5? $1?

Because Federal law says minimum wage is at least $7.25. Most places protesting pay more than minimum wage FYI (Mcdonalds/Walmart)


Why does it matter to what they deserve? It doesn't to anyone else, and it never has. The same defeatist arguments were used to oppose raising the minimum wage to $7.25, to $5.25, to $4.75, to $3. You'd figure by now, opposers would come up with some new material since it hasn't worked so far. Lol.
So you just arbitrarily picked a number?

How has the minimum wage HELPED workers? All data (which i have posted before) has shown that despite minimum wage increases, and despite social welfare spending Poverty rate has stayed the same. There is ZERO data to show that raising the minimum wage does anything but inflate prices and make it harder for the poor to survive (it diminishes their buying power).

So, your argument is that when we raised the minimum wage from $4-5-6-7 ..............it didnt work so we need to raise it more? LOL This is how dense you are. You dont even realize the argument you are making conmpletly contradicts your beliefs. We have raised the minimum wage in the past, and by definition IT DIDNT WORK so you want to raise it more. So why not $20/hr?



"Why not raise it to $30, $50, $100/hr" - slippery slope, defeated.

Why $15? Seriously, why $15 an hour. What data shows that is good enough, that everything will be ok. How come they struggle at $7.55 an hour, but $15 hr we all sing koombaya and everything is great?


"They don't deserve it" - false
They dont deserve it, they EARN it. If you have skills to make $15 hr you get paid it or you go get hired for that job. Low skilled labor makes low skilled wages. Period.


"Blah blah blah skill level" - false
Skill level correlates to pay. Its why I make $50,000 a year and the guy next to me with CCISP makes $75,000 a year. Its why The guy next to him make $100k a year because he has his masters and PMP.

So if you dont get paid based upon skillset, what do you think your pay should be based on? Fuzzy warm feelings?


"Worldwide global inflation recession crash" - false
Ripple effect would be bad just like it was back in 90s when they raised wages. People would be laid off, prices would rise , its not even debateable, go look at econ data from the 90s or take it from someone who lived through it. I was a lifeguard at the YMCA and we laid 1 HS off when they passed the higher Minimum wage. My pay went up, but John lost his job because of it.



"Minimum wage is separate from what employers pay employees" - first time I've heard that one, dunno what that non-sensical babble has to do with what we're talking about here
youre just not smart enough to understand it probably because you never lived it.

Minimum wage is federal minimum standards. WalMart pays what they think their labor force is WORTH the be competitive in the market place. It doesnt have to be minimum wage, it just cant be below it.

The AVERAGE Sales Associate at Wal Mart (this excludes managers) is $8.86 /hr. They make MORE than minimum wage. If WalMart wanted to make more money they could be shitty and pay them less. they dont. They voluntarily pay them more.

IF they arent happy with their wages, go work somewhere else.



There's a reason why I don't use emotional arguments and slippery slope fallacies. I know enough to avoid them. Frankly it's getting old pointing out when the rest of this forum uses them. Figured one would learn by the 2nd or 3rd time. Not by the 174th.
The issue is most of the people wanting to strike probably have a shitty resume and cant get a higher paying job. So, they want the system to change for them. Instead of becoming a better worker, they have been brainwashed into thinking the evil Company OWES them.

I sincerely hope that Walmart caves, pays them $15/hr and then lays off 50% of the work force. Fuck em. Ill survive, because I can afford to shop at Target or Publix, or Walmart, I make enough money. And I have worked shitty dead end jobs that paid Minimum wage.

[Vteckidd]

Its useless because Blank doesnt understand how everthing else in the economy would be affected. he doesnt understand how economics works which is why he never answers any of the main questions people ask. Hes so ideological , EVERYTHING is partisan to him if you dont believe his way. He cant possible understand the other side. Id be all for raising wages if he could provide a solid argument on why and how to do it

Why $15/hr? Why not pay everyone $50,000 a year? Surely that will solve everything and everyone will be fine, nothing will be affected. Price of milk, clothing, etc will all stay the same because the Corporations will just absorb the cost and deal with less profit.

Of course, im sure they have intricate models that show how a $15/hr increase would effect the current business model

/SARCASM

[Sinfix_15]

Because Federal law says minimum wage is at least $7.25. Most places protesting pay more than minimum wage FYI (Mcdonalds/Walmart)


So you just arbitrarily picked a number?

How has the minimum wage HELPED workers? All data (which i have posted before) has shown that despite minimum wage increases, and despite social welfare spending Poverty rate has stayed the same. There is ZERO data to show that raising the minimum wage does anything but inflate prices and make it harder for the poor to survive (it diminishes their buying power).

So, your argument is that when we raised the minimum wage from $4-5-6-7 ..............it didnt work so we need to raise it more? LOL This is how dense you are. You dont even realize the argument you are making conmpletly contradicts your beliefs. We have raised the minimum wage in the past, and by definition IT DIDNT WORK so you want to raise it more. So why not $20/hr?




Why $15? Seriously, why $15 an hour. What data shows that is good enough, that everything will be ok. How come they struggle at $7.55 an hour, but $15 hr we all sing koombaya and everything is great?


They dont deserve it, they EARN it. If you have skills to make $15 hr you get paid it or you go get hired for that job. Low skilled labor makes low skilled wages. Period.


Skill level correlates to pay. Its why I make $50,000 a year and the guy next to me with CCISP makes $75,000 a year. Its why The guy next to him make $100k a year because he has his masters and PMP.

So if you dont get paid based upon skillset, what do you think your pay should be based on? Fuzzy warm feelings?


Ripple effect would be bad just like it was back in 90s when they raised wages. People would be laid off, prices would rise , its not even debateable, go look at econ data from the 90s or take it from someone who lived through it. I was a lifeguard at the YMCA and we laid 1 HS off when they passed the higher Minimum wage. My pay went up, but John lost his job because of it.



youre just not smart enough to understand it probably because you never lived it.

Minimum wage is federal minimum standards. WalMart pays what they think their labor force is WORTH the be competitive in the market place. It doesnt have to be minimum wage, it just cant be below it.

The AVERAGE Sales Associate at Wal Mart (this excludes managers) is $8.86 /hr. They make MORE than minimum wage. If WalMart wanted to make more money they could be shitty and pay them less. they dont. They voluntarily pay them more.

IF they arent happy with their wages, go work somewhere else.



The issue is most of the people wanting to strike probably have a shitty resume and cant get a higher paying job. So, they want the system to change for them. Instead of becoming a better worker, they have been brainwashed into thinking the evil Company OWES them.

I sincerely hope that Walmart caves, pays them $15/hr and then lays off 50% of the work force. Fuck em. Ill survive, because I can afford to shop at Target or Publix, or Walmart, I make enough money. And I have worked shitty dead end jobs that paid Minimum wage.

The sad thing is, you're breaking down complex economic concepts, exposing the psychological aspects that people seem overlook, and single handedly dispelling the raging liberal myths that our one village idiot seems to cling to. If reality is this easy to grasp, what does it say about those who cant reach it?

[Browning151]

lol

[.blank cd]

Because Federal law says minimum wage is at least $7.25. Most places protesting pay more than minimum wage FYI (Mcdonalds/Walmart)


So you just arbitrarily picked a number?Dont ask me. I don't know why they picked $15. Probably to get a discussion started. In any case, there is a legitimate argument to be had that inflation and productivity is outpacing the current minimum wage.


How has the minimum wage HELPED workers? All data (which i have posted before) has shown that despite minimum wage increases, and despite social welfare spending Poverty rate has stayed the same. There is ZERO data to show that raising the minimum wage does anything but inflate prices and make it harder for the poor to survive (it diminishes their buying power).What are you reading? Econ for kidZ?



So, your argument is that when we raised the minimum wage from $4-5-6-7 ..............it didnt work so we need to raise it more?Not my argument at all. I wouldn't say anything that stupid.



They dont deserve it, they EARN it. If you have skills to make $15 hr you get paid it or you go get hired for that job. Low skilled labor makes low skilled wages. Period.

Skill level correlates to pay. Its why I make $50,000 a year and the guy next to me with CCISP makes $75,000 a year. Its why The guy next to him make $100k a year because he has his masters and PMP..If we based minimum wage on skill alone, it would still be 30 cents an hr. Don't be dense. No business has ever paid its employees based on skill alone. You'd know that if you were ever in the capacity that required setting someone's salary.


Ripple effect would be bad just like it was back in 90s when they raised wages. People would be laid off, prices would rise , its not even debateable, go look at econ data from the 90s or take it from someone who lived through it. I was a lifeguard at the YMCA and we laid 1 HS off when they passed the higher Minimum wage. My pay went up, but John lost his job because of it.We had such a horrible economy in the 90s.

You should probably lay off the anecdotal evidence. It's not helping your case any. One business's labor demands aren't the same as all of them. But you should know that. You're an Econ student too...


Minimum wage is federal minimum standards. WalMart pays what they think their labor force is WORTH the be competitive in the market place. It doesnt have to be minimum wage, it just cant be below it. Before you said it was based on skill alone. Make up your mind. Lol.[/QUOTE]


Its useless because Blank doesnt understand how everthing else in the economy would be affected.This is coming from the person who believes wages are paid based on skill alone. Got it.


he doesnt understand how economics works which is why he never answers any of the main questions people ask.You mean the questions YOURE asking that everyone else in the field has good answers for? Those questions?


Why $15/hr? Why not pay everyone $50,000 a year? Surely that will solve everything and everyone will be fine, nothing will be affected. Price of milk, clothing, etc will all stay the same because the Corporations will just absorb the cost and deal with less profit.Hey, it's another slippery slope argument. No surprise here. Why not just make minimum wage $50k? 100k? 200k?

Thats one of those questions everyone is asking right? LOL

[.blank cd]

You guys make this entirely too easy for me

[BanginJimmy]

Not my argument at all. I wouldn't say anything that stupid.

You do all the time.



If we based minimum wage on skill alone, it would still be 30 cents an hr. Don't be dense. No business has ever paid its employees based on skill alone. You'd know that if you were ever in the capacity that required setting someone's salary.

Not on skill alone, but on skills, qualifications, experience, and available workers in the marketplace. You need no skills, qualifications, or experience and there is an unlimited number of potential workers to bus tables or stock shelves. Thats is why the wages are low and dont need to rise.



Before you said it was based on skill alone. Make up your mind. Lol.

You dont think your skills affect your worth as an employee?



Hey, it's another slippery slope argument. No surprise here. Why not just make minimum wage $50k? 100k? 200k?

You still havent realized that raising the minimum wage will affect other areas huh?

[Vteckidd]

248925

No solutions, just mindless liberal drivel that has no basis for facts or forward thinking. Seems legit.

[Vteckidd]

You do all the time.




Not on skill alone, but on skills, qualifications, experience, and available workers in the marketplace. You need no skills, qualifications, or experience and there is an unlimited number of potential workers to bus tables or stock shelves. Thats is why the wages are low and dont need to rise.




You dont think your skills affect your worth as an employee?




You still havent realized that raising the minimum wage will affect other areas huh?

Its impossible to ration with him.

I never said ONLY skills dictate what youre worth, he said skills dont matter, I said they do. SO then he puts words in my mouth and goes off on some tangent about nothing I even said.

I said:

Skill level correlates to pay

He then says

Before you said it was based on skill alone.

Does that look like what I said? Absolutely not, but this is what the Left does. they make up arguments by picking stuff out of what you say, despite it being in CLEAR english.

Skills mean: Education, Training, experience. That is the definition of skillset in the work place.

If you want to raise minimum wage, go for it, but show me WHY, the arguement has to be better than "I CANT SURVIVE ON X.XX an hour" because minimum wage isnt meant for you to SURVIVE. MINIMUM WAGE means the WORST JOB YOU COULD POSSIBLY HAVE.

hey man, some people just arent made out to be in the work force. not my problem

[Vteckidd]

WHY $15/ hr? Would you settle for 10$? WHY?

They cant answer this question because its a bunch of mindless idiots looking to get free money for doing no more work.

I cant survive on $50,000 a year, I need more, give it to me. Why not?

Because they get to arbitrarily pick who is poor an needs help? Who died and made them king?

[.blank cd]

Not on skill alone, but on skills, qualifications, experience, and available workers in the marketplace.
Not only skills, economic conditions as measured by real and nominal gross domestic product, inflation, labor supply and demand, wage levels, distribution and differentials, employment terms, productivity growth, labor costs, business operating costs, the number and trend of bankruptcies, economic freedom rankings, standards of living and the prevailing average wage rate. Real economists don't pretend like minimum wage is linked to how much a couple people think they deserve. Math doesn't work that way.


You dont think your skills affect your worth as an employee?We're talking about a bump in the baseline. Not cushioning someone's career path



You still havent realized that raising the minimum wage will affect other areas huh?I am probably the only one in here who knows how raising the minimum wage will affect the economy. It's what I do. We can use math, models, studies, and supply and demand curves to figure out at what point between $7.25/hr and $100,000 dollars a year would have the best economic impact. One thing is for certain: there is an argument to be had that productivity and inflation have outpaced the current minimum wage and that we are at a point where it would be beneficial to raise it. We don't focus on how we feel about who deserves what and the $15/hr BS. That's just something that gets news junkies riled up and feelings have very little room in empirical discussion.

[Vteckidd]

Not only skills, economic conditions as measured by real and nominal gross domestic product, inflation, labor supply and demand, wage levels, distribution and differentials, employment terms, productivity growth, labor costs, business operating costs, the number and trend of bankruptcies, economic freedom rankings, standards of living and the prevailing average wage rate. Real economists don't pretend like minimum wage is linked to how much a couple people think they deserve. Math doesn't work that way.

Search Wikipedia for large words, post on forum to make it sound smart and interesting


We're talking about a bump in the baseline. Not cushioning someone's career path
Give no information about why or how we should implement said actions



I am probably the only one in here who knows how raising the minimum wage will affect the economy. It's what I do. We can use math, models, studies, and supply and demand curves to figure out at what point between $7.25/hr and $100,000 dollars a year would have the best economic impact. One thing is for certain: there is an argument to be had that productivity and inflation have outpaced the current minimum wage and that we are at a point where it would be beneficial to raise it. We don't focus on how we feel about who deserves what and the $15/hr BS. That's just something that gets news junkies riled up and feelings have very little room in empirical discussion.

Say im the smartest in the room without posting anything that backs this statement up.


/Blank.CD


We have argued why it wont work, and posted numbers and decades of theories/real life experience that shows it doesnt work.

You have dismissed all of it and shown no facts of your own.

So yeah, you have zero to add. Move along

[.blank cd]

I've added enough. Everything else from this point will be emotional banter and feels and such

I'm sure with all your facts you're dishing out maybe you could give me the math that shows how much people deserve. Maybe you can plot that on a graph for us. You know, facts. Lol.

[BanginJimmy]

Not only skills, economic conditions as measured by real and nominal gross domestic product, inflation, labor supply and demand, wage levels, distribution and differentials, employment terms, productivity growth, labor costs, business operating costs, the number and trend of bankruptcies, economic freedom rankings, standards of living and the prevailing average wage rate. Real economists don't pretend like minimum wage is linked to how much a couple people think they deserve. Math doesn't work that way. {/quote]

So you completely ignored most of what I said and stopped with skills again? Distribution has absolutely zero to do with paid wages. They only things that determine your cost to your employer are your skills, knowledge, certifications, and experience. Nothing else.

I mean really. You throw out all these terms and they have absolutely nothing to do with what you are quoting or with this thread. What zip code your employer resides in has FAR more to do with wages than GDP does.

[QUOTE=.blank cd;39532210]We're talking about a bump in the baseline. Not cushioning someone's career path

What does a career path have to do with your worth to your employer? Considering we arent talking about upward mobility, I am going to say absolfuckinglutly nothing.



I am probably the only one in here who knows how raising the minimum wage will affect the economy. It's what I do. We can use math, models, studies, and supply and demand curves to figure out at what point between $7.25/hr and $100,000 dollars a year would have the best economic impact. One thing is for certain: there is an argument to be had that productivity and inflation have outpaced the current minimum wage and that we are at a point where it would be beneficial to raise it. We don't focus on how we feel about who deserves what and the $15/hr BS. That's just something that gets news junkies riled up and feelings have very little room in empirical discussion.

You can jerk yourself as much as you want, you have zero credibility. You have backed noting up with facts.

[BanginJimmy]

I've added enough. Everything else from this point will be emotional banter and feels and such

I'm sure with all your facts you're dishing out maybe you could give me the math that shows how much people deserve. Maybe you can plot that on a graph for us. You know, facts. Lol.

And this is what we get when he is backed against the wall and will be forced to prove his position with facts.

[.blank cd]

I've proved my position with facts. All the rest have offered is pure emotion filled whining about how much people deserve. Things that don't have a place in empirical dicussion. If that's what you guys want to talk about then that's great, have at it.

[.blank cd]

Still waiting on this data that says what McDonald's workers deserve. Lol

[Vteckidd]

I've proved my position with facts. All the rest have offered is pure emotion filled whining about how much people deserve. Things that don't have a place in empirical dicussion. If that's what you guys want to talk about then that's great, have at it.

You cant tell me what they should be paid, and I can tell you they are paid a competitive wage based upon their skill set.

Thats the end of this thread.

The wages they are paid take into account what Target/Costco/Kmart and other competitors are paying their employees for the work they perform and the return walmart sees on their investment in those employees and the goods they sell. (AKA ECON 101)

There is no reason to move the line UP unless the employer feels the need to do so (because they own those jobs). They will pay more if they feel like:
Attracting BETTER candidates
Its not cost prohibitive
There isnt legions of uneducated 20 year olds waiting to take that job

You cant argue from a position of strength when a 17 year old can walk in and take your job from you. you are replaceable. Youre goal should be to make yourself irreplaceable (through skill set).

Raising the minimum wage doesnt make their lives better it makes it WORSE. You diminish their buying power (which you keep ignoring). The argument could be made that we should be trying to help them into better jobs through training, but I suspect most of them want $40,000 a year jobs on $20,000 a year training.

[Vteckidd]

Still waiting on this data that says what McDonald's workers deserve. Lol

VERY Simple

$7.25 hour at the minimum. Which is the Federal Law. Mcdonalds pays more than that
McDonald's Hourly Pay | Glassdoor (http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/McDonald-s-Hourly-Pay-E432.htm)

Mcdonalds provides the job, they set the wages. IF you dont like it, you can go work somewhere else. They believe their workers deserve between $7.75 and 11/hr (hourly workers).

There you go.

Now, show me the data that shows they deserve an increase or a pay raise

[geoff]

One thing is for certain: Blank should seriously ask for a refund of any money he has paid for education...it obviously was shit

[.blank cd]

You cant tell me what they should be paid, and I can tell you they are paid a competitive wage based upon their skill set.More than $7.26


(AKA ECON 101)If you liked intro, macro 200 will really blow your mind.


Raising the minimum wage doesnt make their lives better it makes it WORSE. You diminish their buying power (which you keep ignoring). The argument could be made that we should be trying to help them into better jobs through training, but I suspect most of them want $40,000 a year jobs on $20,000 a year training.If you say so.

[Vteckidd]

More than $7.26

Good, they make more than that already( you should read the information. $7.75-$11). Answer the other question you keep avoiding.....why do they deserve $15 hour or more than what they make now.


If you liked intro, macro 200 will really blow your mind.
You cant grasp the lower level courses, so you shouldnt move onto upper level (Minor in ECON)


If you say so.
Sweet rebuttal bro

[.blank cd]

One thing is for certain: Blank should seriously ask for a refund of any money he has paid for education...it obviously was shit

Yeah. They don't teach us to use our feelings and emotions and build arguments around logical fallacies. Wish I woulda learned that part.

[Vteckidd]

Lets see how many times Blank uses Logical Fallacy in a thread. Must be some term he read on Wikipedia earlier.

No emotions here, just raw facts.

[geoff]

See that's the thing. Everyone here has presented sound evidence as to why this wont work...you blatantly ignore it. Your ECON professor would be ashamed and probably slap you for being so stupid. There is a deeper side to your argument, one that is not grounded in sound logic or basic math/economics. It is a liberal one that is being shouted out by the left day in and out.

You assume that these companies will raise wages across the board and it will not affect the price of goods/services. You assume and would prefer them to just take it as a hit to their profit margins...you know...since these Evil Corporations make too much money. You and all the other lefties believe these simpleton no skill bottom of the barrel workers deserve more money for what reason? Yet the companies that employ them and the people in charge whom assume the risk and did what was required to earn their positions ( hard work and education ) don't deserve to determine how much profit they make....admit it...

[Vteckidd]

I could post word for work from my Macro and Micro econ books about all of this stuff. I dont know why I get sucked into bantering with someone who is obviously well below my intelligence and cant comprehend simple concepts.

I dont think blank is that stupid. I think he likes saying stuff that is inflammatory and gives him attention.

[BanginJimmy]

I've proved my position with facts. All the rest have offered is pure emotion filled whining about how much people deserve. Things that don't have a place in empirical dicussion. If that's what you guys want to talk about then that's great, have at it.

Would you mind point out one of these facts. I havent seen any.

[BanginJimmy]

Blank, where did you go to school and who were your econ professors. I am going to send them a link to some of these threads and ask if this was what he taught in his classes.

[Vteckidd]

Things that don't have a place in empirical dicussion.
248926
Empirical- based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic.


take it from someone who lived through it. I was a lifeguard at the YMCA and we laid 1 HS off when they passed the higher Minimum wage. My pay went up, but John lost his job because of it.





It's not helping your case any. One business's labor demands aren't the same as all of them. But you should know that.
So, ones personal experience with a minimum wage job has no bearing on minimum wage jobs?


LOL

[.blank cd]

Would you mind point out one of these facts. I havent seen any.

There right next to the facts about what people deserve.

[.blank cd]

I could post word for work from my Macro and Micro econ books about all of this stuff.

That would be great. Please post word for word from an Econ book that states you shouldn't increase minimum wage because minimum wage employees don't deserve it.

This response should be good.

[.blank cd]

Since no one is gonna post any scholarly info on deservedness in a labor market,

First of all, let's start by defining my stance, so the rest of us aren't strawman'ing it up in here trying to defeat the big bad liberal in the room. I realize within the active dialogue, workers are demanding a living wage increase of $7. I'm going to assume this is the impetus to a discussion on minimum wage increases, and that the number "$15" is an arbitrary number used to evoke a response or initiate a dialogue. So the question becomes Should minimum wage be raised?

We can look at the history of minimum wage in the US, adjusted m for inflation, and see that productivity and inflation have outpaced minimum wage.
http://s4.epi.org/files/charts/BP371_Figure-C.png.538 which Is less than 40% of average production wage.

The neoclassical model of economics says that raising the price floor (minimum wages) above the equilibrium wage (what typical market forces dictate wages should be and have leveled off at) should create unemployment, but this model is typically based on simple supply and demand curves, and often overlooks other complicating factors, for example, the monopsony that exists in the labor market, or that the buyers (employers) have more market power than the sellers (employees).

We can use a graph like this one to plot labor supply and labor demand against wage equilibriums and binding minimum wage

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Monopsony-minimum-wage.svg

A number of economists have accepted the theory (read: explanation, not "guess") that increases in minimum wage have little to no negative effect on employment. Kruger and Card did some extensive research on the subject

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.5661&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Furthermore, these economists have adopted the theory that minimum wages have an overall positive effect on poverty. Here's a study by Addison and Blackburn describing the "poverty-reducing" effect of minimum wages.

http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24285/1/dp4298.pdf

Am I for raising the minimum wage? Yes and no. I like the case David Cooper of the Economic Policy Institute makes for raising it to $10 an hour, in incremental increases (like what's been done almost every time minimum wage has been increased.

Raising the Federal Minimum Wage to $10.10 Would Lift Wages for Millions and Provide a Modest Economic Boost | Economic Policy Institute (http://www.epi.org/publication/raising-federal-minimum-wage-to-1010/#_note1)

But I believe, even with EITC supplementing minimum wage, we can do better as a society to lift poverty and provide an economic benefit at the same time and ease the burden from employers.

Anyone care to refute. Please make sure you bring "sound evidence", or am I going to have to treat all subsequent posts as garbage in/garbage out and give a philosophical lesson in source credibility?

[Echonova]

Anyone care to refute. Please make sure you bring "sound evidence", or am I going to have to treat all subsequent posts as garbage in/garbage out and give a philosophical lesson in source credibility?


248927

[.blank cd]

I was hoping you'd post that study. LOL


A number of questions were raised about the Neumark and Wascher results. During the time that both sets of data were collected, restaurant owners were widely aware of Card and Krueger’s findings. This allows for introduction of possible bias on behalf of the respondents. Restaurant owners opposed to minimum wages had a personal interest in overstating the impact of the minimum wage increase to skew the results in order to dissuade future minimum wage increases. Neumark and Wascher solicited responses directly from restaurants with a letter explaining that they were trying to “re-examine the New Jersey-Pennsylvania minimum wage study” (Neumark and Wascher 2000, 1,395).

In a review of Neumark and Wascher’s findings, Card and Krueger found that the results were driven by a single franchisee that provided Pennsylvania data showing a strong increase in employment. By reporting much stronger employment growth in Pennsylvania, which was the control state, this outlier skewed the expected result for New Jersey in the absence of a minimum wage increase. But when that outlier was excluded from the data, no statistically significant results could be found. Card and Krueger also found that the EmPI-collected data showed a much stronger negative employment effect (i.e., higher elasticity) than the data collected by Neumark and Wascher, which on its own did not show a statistically significant result.

Minimum wage trends: Understanding past and contemporary research | Economic Policy Institute (http://www.epi.org/publication/bp178/)

To which Card Kruger reexamine their data followed up with...

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.5661&rep=rep1&type=pdf

They concluded this time that:


After analyzing BNW’s data, our original survey data, publicly available BLS data, and most importantly, the BLS ES-202 fast-food establishment data, we reach the following conclusion:
The increase in New Jersey’s minimum wage probably had no effect on total employment in New Jersey’s fast-food industry, and possibly had a small positive effect.

[Vteckidd]

And so it begins, the "Blank only accepts his own sources of information as facts" conundrum. Ill bite.




So the question becomes Should minimum wage be raised?

We can look at the history of minimum wage in the US, adjusted m for inflation, and see that productivity and inflation have outpaced minimum wage.
Has inflation outpaced ALL wages? It affects everyone, not just the low wage earner. Im not sure you understand how inflation works. You cant put the low wage earners in a bubble and talk about how inflation hasnt kept pace with them, and ignore every other wage earner and pretend they are in a vacuum and dont suffer the same effect.

If inflation raised 20% tomorrow, it raises for everyone, but it affects the poor (or those with the fewest dollars) the MOST.

See: Price/wage spiral

So, the fact that minimum wage hasnt kept up with Inflation, is moot because all wages are affected by this. If you raised everyones wages to $12 or $40 hour tomorrow, everything would slide up, and the net effect would be ZILCH. I dont know how many times I have to say this for you to understand it but low wage workers make low wages, CRAZY I KNOW. You dont help them by paying them more and inflating their wages, you move them into a better job. You also ignore the possibility that prices will change.

I think its laughable that people want to argue wages not keeping up with inflation, then want to implement inflation to solve the problem. LOL Sure it bothers the low wage earners the most as previously stated, but you dont help them by raising the price floor for no reason but to "make them have a better life" unless you want to suffer the consequences.

you dont eradicate poverty with inflation

The neoclassical model of economics says that raising the price floor (minimum wages) above the equilibrium wage (what typical market forces dictate wages should be and have leveled off at) should create unemployment, but this model is typically based on simple supply and demand curves, and often overlooks other complicating factors, for example, the monopsony that exists in the labor market, or that the buyers (employers) have more market power than the sellers (employees).

*Uses big words stolen from some other web site*




A number of economists have accepted the theory (read: explanation, not "guess") that increases in minimum wage have little to no negative effect on employment. Kruger and Card did some extensive research on the subject

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.5661&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Theories are educated guesses. Otherwise they would be called facts. I think you mean Kreuger not Kruger


Furthermore, these economists have adopted the theory that minimum wages have an overall positive effect on poverty. Here's a study by Addison and Blackburn describing the "poverty-reducing" effect of minimum wages.

http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24285/1/dp4298.pdf

well, unless you look at poverty charts like this that show it hasnt changed

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/9-13-13pov-f1.jpg


Am I for raising the minimum wage? Yes and no. I like the case David Cooper of the Economic Policy Institute makes for raising it to $10 an hour, in incremental increases (like what's been done almost every time minimum wage has been increased.

Its a very short sighted way of helping people. The initial impact will help, but long term, we will wind up where we are now, arguing for more wage increases to help the poor which show it doesnt work.

Look you can raise minimum wage all you want, just dont complain when Mcdonalds lays people off to keep their costs somewhat static. Will you trade jobs for higher wages? The conversation should be how to get low wage earners into better jobs, not paying their low wage jobs more because they cant be better workers.



Anyone care to refute. Please make sure you bring "sound evidence", or am I going to have to treat all subsequent posts as garbage in/garbage out and give a philosophical lesson in source credibility?
Anything we post wont be accepted because you are a dense partisan person who has tunnel vision.

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/9-13-13pov-f2.jpg

I would feel differently if we were in the position of economic strength, but we arent. If economy was booming then you could argue, but with 7+% -9% of people still UE, and the labor force shrinking, the last thing you want to do is make businesses choose between layoffs and employing when you raise their costs.


http://247wallst.com/jobs/2013/07/31/the-wage-hike-to-15-would-cost-mcdonalds-8-billion/

[Vteckidd]

I was hoping you'd post that study. LOL




LOL I rest my case, right on cue. Only his sources are accepted, only his data is relevant.

[geoff]

^ Careful, if you don't agree with his opinion or his views on the economy...you might be labeled a racist or bigot....you obviously want these minimum wage poor folks to starve and die you evil capitalist!

[.blank cd]

And so it begins, the "Blank only accepts his own sources of information as facts" conundrum. Ill bite.You really shouldn't. But, your choice...


Has inflation outpaced ALL wages? It affects everyone, not just the low wage earner. Im not sure you understand how inflation works. You cant put the low wage earners in a bubble and talk about how inflation hasnt kept pace with them, and ignore every other wage earner and pretend they are in a vacuum and dont suffer the same effect.

If inflation raised 20% tomorrow, it raises for everyone, but it affects the poor (or those with the fewest dollars) the MOST.

See: Price/wage spiral

So, the fact that minimum wage hasnt kept up with Inflation, is moot because all wages are affected by this. If you raised everyones wages to $12 or $40 hour tomorrow, everything would slide up, and the net effect would be ZILCH. I dont know how many times I have to say this for you to understand it but low wage workers make low wages, CRAZY I KNOW. You dont help them by paying them more and inflating their wages, you move them into a better job. You also ignore the possibility that prices will change.

I think its laughable that people want to argue wages not keeping up with inflation, then want to implement inflation to solve the problem. LOL Sure it bothers the low wage earners the most as previously stated, but you dont help them by raising the price floor for no reason but to "make them have a better life" unless you want to suffer the consequences.Your evidence to support this?


you dont eradicate poverty with inflationstrawman.



Theories are educated guesses.Unequivocally false. No one with a formal education thinks theories are educated guesses. Especially with any type of declaration in economic sciences.


Look you can raise minimum wage all you want, just dont complain when Mcdonalds lays people off to keep their costs somewhat static. Will you trade jobs for higher wages? The conversation should be how to get low wage earners into better jobs, not paying their low wage jobs more because they cant be better workers.Evidence shows the opposite effect on employment, yet you can't provide evidence that refutes it, and still state it as truth anyway.




LOL I rest my case, right on cue. Only his sources are accepted, only his data is relevant.Newumark and Waschers data was peer-reviewed and refuted within the economic community. I don't know how else to put that to you. If you want to believe in it because it aligns with your ideals, that's your prerogative. Just understand that isn't how sciences have ever worked.

Unless someone is going to post some sound evidence on deservedness and labor markets, I think I'm done with this thread.

[.blank cd]

INB4 we start posting Peter Shiff articles

[Vteckidd]

You really shouldn't. But, your choice...

Your evidence to support this?

Yeah, like, its fact man. Inflation impacts everyone. How do you not know this LOL Most economists agree that inflation hurts the poor more than the rich, because they have less dollars. I mean these are simple concepts.

If you have $100 and inflation makes it worth $90, its worse for you than say, me with $1,000,000 and not its worth $900,000. We both see a 10% loss, but who is REALLY hurt? Conversely, if your $10 hour wage becomes $20/hr, and my $100,000 income becomes $200,000, we both saw a 100% increase, but if prices for milk raise 50%, you will be hurt more. You have less dollars to spend, therefore price changes affect you more. THIS I THE WHOLE REASON FOR THIS ARGUMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Again, simple econ concepts.


strawman.
Not a strawman, inflation , which is what doubling minimum wage would do, doesnt solve poverty. Heres the most i can dumb it down:
$10/hr isnt enough, i cant survive
Raise Minimum wage to $15/hr
People making $15/hr before MW hike, now make $20/hr
Costs rise for all businesses
Price raise to reflect the added costs now associated
Jobs are lost due to rising prices

Nothing changes and in 10 years youll want to raise MW to $20/hr and start all over again.



Unequivocally false. No one with a formal education thinks theories are educated guesses. Especially with any type of declaration in economic sciences.
Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. Depending on the context, the results might for example include generalized explanations of how nature works. The word has its roots in ancient Greek, but in modern use it has taken on several different related meanings. A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory.
Evidence shows the opposite effect on employment, yet you can't provide evidence that refutes it, and still state it as truth anyway.

I can provide economic data that refutes their findings, (and have) that you have dismissed because you dont agree with it.




Newumark and Waschers data was peer-reviewed and refuted within the economic community. I don't know how else to put that to you. If you want to believe in it because it aligns with your ideals, that's your prerogative. Just understand that isn't how sciences have ever worked.



Unless someone is going to post some sound evidence on deservedness and labor markets, I think I'm done with this thread.

Nothing we post youll give any credit to because you have demonstrated the lack of mental capacity to understand simple econ concepts. You cite handpicked data to back your argument, and dismiss anyone elses data as "biased"

you cant argue with irrational people.

[Vteckidd]

INB4 we start posting Peter Shiff articles

Because Peter Schiff is so biased right? Because he doesnt support your views?

I guess a leading investor/economist has no value in your eyes.

Again, Blank likes to use his own data and refuse to use his own brain, then dismiss anything that doesnt agree with him

[.blank cd]

Yeah, like, its fact man. Inflation impacts everyone. How do you not know this LOL Most economists agree that inflation hurts the poor more than the rich, because they have less dollars. I mean these are simple concepts.

If you have $100 and inflation makes it worth $90, its worse for you than say, me with $1,000,000 and not its worth $900,000. We both see a 10% loss, but who is REALLY hurt? Conversely, if your $10 hour wage becomes $20/hr, and my $100,000 income becomes $200,000, we both saw a 100% increase, but if prices for milk raise 50%, you will be hurt more. You have less dollars to spend, therefore price changes affect you more. THIS I THE WHOLE REASON FOR THIS ARGUMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Again, simple econ concepts.And we're talking about advanced economic concepts.


Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking. Depending on the context, the results might for example include generalized explanations of how nature works. The word has its roots in ancient Greek, but in modern use it has taken on several different related meanings. A theory is not the same as a hypothesis. A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory.Thank you for being honest and posting the actual definition of theory. Can we expect this level of honesty with the rest of your posts?


I can provide economic data that refutes their findings...Where is it? That's what I'm waiting for. Echo has made the only attempt at providing economic data.


Nothing we post youll give any credit to because you have demonstrated the lack of mental capacity to understand simple econ concepts. You cite handpicked data to back your argument, and dismiss anyone elses data as "biased"Just do it the right way. I cited established economic data, Echo made and honest attempt to refute that data, but the study he used was reviewed and refuted by the economic community, and thusly replied to. I pointed it out for him. End of story


you cant argue with irrational people.I know. You don't have to tell me. I know. LOL

[.blank cd]

Because Peter Schiff is so biased right? Because he doesnt support your views?

I guess a leading investor...
Lets stop right there. A leading economist he is not. Do not confuse an economist with someone who posts on a blog their views on profit maximization and how much he wants to link it with a global economic model.

He is an investor. Nothing more. If I want advice on how to maximize my return on my investment portfolio, me and him can have a discussion.

[Vteckidd]

Where is it? That's what I'm waiting for. Echo has made the only attempt at providing economic data.
To your little hearts content. Specifically addressing the Neumark (which you dismiss)and Kreuger studies (which are not accepted as facts). But Im sure "Its FORBES DOE SO I DONT BELIEVE IT" is coming

The Minimum Wage Typifies Much That Is Wrong With Washington - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2013/04/01/the-minimum-wage-typifies-much-that-is-wrong-with-washington/)

Point is, your study has glaring holes in it, and the Neumark study is just as ambiguous. yet, you choose to accept one and not the other.

So rather than waste my time posting more data (which you ignore and have ignored , didnt even respond to the poverty chart) , Ill just concede you live in a dark corner of a room with a very small view of the world.

Youre irrational, its impossible to have any type of legitimate discussion with you.

[Vteckidd]

Mark Wilson of Applied Economic Strategies warned in a Cato Institute:
The minimum wage is no weapon against poverty. Explained Wilson: “Since 1995, eight studies have examined the income and poverty effects of minimum wage increases, and all but one have found that past minimum wage hikes had no effect on poverty.”

/THREAD

[.blank cd]

/THREAD

This thread ended a long time ago. You just keep wanting to drag out the inevitable conclusion. LMAO

[Vteckidd]

GAME SET MATCH. Thanks for playing

[.blank cd]

GAME SET MATCH. Thanks for playing

Yessir. You thoroughly schooled me with your Forbes opinion articles. LOL

If I would've known it was that easy to rebuff empirical research, I would've just cited other people's opinions the whole time.

[.blank cd]

Interesting dynamic on this forum. Starts out with..
See that's the thing. Everyone here has presented sound evidence as to why this wont work..

And then when the "liberal" presents actual evidence...
And so it begins, the "Blank only accepts his own sources of information as facts" conundrum.


LOL I rest my case, right on cue. Only his sources are accepted, only his data is relevant.


^ Careful, if you don't agree with his opinion or his views on the economy...you might be labeled a racist or bigot....you obviously want these minimum wage poor folks to starve and die you evil capitalist!

And then when more opinions are presented as factual evidence...


The Minimum Wage Typifies Much That Is Wrong With Washington - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2013/04/01/the-minimum-wage-typifies-much-that-is-wrong-with-washington/).

It's...


GAME SET MATCH. Thanks for playing

Why I keep playing this game, I dunno. Maybe I'm just a sadistic asshole who likes to watch willfully ignorant people squirm and go through cognitive dissonance when they're presented with evidence that rebuffs their belief system.

[Vteckidd]

Yessir. You thoroughly schooled me with your Forbes opinion articles. LOL

If I would've known it was that easy to rebuff empirical research, I would've just cited other people's opinions the whole time.

Article cited numerous economists and economic studies. COnclusion is based upon opinion drawn from those studies, thats how theories work.

Again, I CALLED IT. No data is acceptable to you unless its what you believe.

Forum troll is trolling

So this is opinion?

Since 1995, eight studies have examined the income and poverty effects of minimum wage increases, and all but one have found that past minimum wage hikes had no effect on poverty.”

mark Wilson is an economist. But I guess his opinion doesnt matter since it doesnt jive with your world view

[Vteckidd]

Blank.cd, "where facts are opinions and opinions are facts depending on how I feel"

Typical liberal

[.blank cd]

Article cited numerous economists and economic studies. COnclusion is based upon opinion drawn from those studies, thats how theories work.

Again, I CALLED IT. No data is acceptable to you unless its what you believe.
Looked for a bibliography, didn't exist. Nor did any links to any studies. If you do that in college, you lose your academic scholarships and you get dropped faster than Phil Robertson from A&E. It's cool on forbes though...

I'm not sure you know what "cite" means

[Vteckidd]

Looked for a bibliography, didn't exist. Nor did any links to any studies. If you do that in college, you lose your academic scholarships and you get dropped faster than Phil Robertson from A&E. It's cool on forbes though...

its not my job to go look up all 8 studies, do your own research.

So the studies and people he quoted are false?

explain.

Numerous studies were cited, as well as interviews with leading economists that challenged both claims of both studies. Thats not relevant.
AHH so Forbes, the leading financial magazine, isnt trustworthy because no bibliography. Do you want me to write a report and use citations, i can do that.

Also, this is his resume

He has over 25 years of economic policy experience including serving seven years as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards Administration at the U.S. Department of Labor for President Bush. There he oversaw and administered the Wage and Hour Division, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, and the Office of Labor-Management Standards. Mr. Wilson was also a Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and Senior Economist, in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, U.S. Department of Labor.

Mr. Wilson has published or co-authored over 80 research papers, testified more than 12 times before Congress, and has frequently briefed members of Congress and the Administration. He has also appeared on a number of national radio and television shows, including, CNN, CNBC, Fox News, and C-SPAN, as well as publishing numerous op-eds in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the Washington Times, and various state newspapers.

Mr. Wilson has a B.A. in economics, and minors in finance and statistics from Kent State University, as well as masters degree studies in economics at George Washington University. He is a member of the American Economic Association and the National Association for Business Economics.

Not trustworthy doe

[Echonova]

I was hoping you'd post that study. LOL



Minimum wage trends: Understanding past and contemporary research | Economic Policy Institute (http://www.epi.org/publication/bp178/)

To which Card Kruger reexamine their data followed up with...

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.5661&rep=rep1&type=pdf

They concluded this time that:All I know is, in 3 hours you personally read the entire study, fact checked all the footnotes/sources and came to your own conclusion about it, rather than Google and regurgitate somebody elses opinion.

So on that basis I accept that we need higher minimum wages.

[.blank cd]

All I know is, in 3 hours you personally read the entire study, fact checked all the footnotes/sources and came to your own conclusion about it, rather than Google and regurgitate somebody elses opinion.

So on that basis I accept that we need higher minimum wages.

In three hours? No. I've read all about that before. I do read pretty fast though.

[.blank cd]

its not my job to go look up all 8 studies, do your own research.

That's weird. When I do it it's....


And so it begins, the "Blank only accepts his own sources of information as facts" conundrum.


LOL I rest my case, right on cue. Only his sources are accepted, only his data is relevant.


^ Careful, if you don't agree with his opinion or his views on the economy...you might be labeled a racist or bigot....you obviously want these minimum wage poor folks to starve and die you evil capitalist!

Weird how that works huh?

Oh well. Such is cognitive dissonance

[Vteckidd]

That's weird. When I do it it's....

I was merely taking the same position you do with everyone else.


Surely I shouldn't have to do the work of a religious scholar like yourself.

It was to show you how 2 faced you are in arguing. When you anyone posts something of substance its refuted as not truthful because you dont agree with it. Or when you get backed into a corner you resort to acting like youre the smartest guy in the room. Or you ask vague questions to try and steer the discussion into a different arena.

You posted a study, I posted information contradicting that study. You claim my study was false (despite it coming from the CBO LOL)

I post an economists article that is easily as reputable as your economist, but you say its Bullshit because its from Forbes and theres no bibliography (despite the fact that Wilson has over 80+ research papers on file you can go read).

Just funny, must be awfully small in that head of yours

[Sinfix_15]

I was merely taking the same position you do with everyone else.



It was to show you how 2 faced you are in arguing. When you anyone posts something of substance its refuted as not truthful because you dont agree with it. Or when you get backed into a corner you resort to acting like youre the smartest guy in the room. Or you ask vague questions to try and steer the discussion into a different arena.

You posted a study, I posted information contradicting that study. You claim my study was false (despite it coming from the CBO LOL)

I post an economists article that is easily as reputable as your economist, but you say its Bullshit because its from Forbes and theres no bibliography (despite the fact that Wilson has over 80+ research papers on file you can go read).

Just funny, must be awfully small in that head of yours

Stop. Take a breath. Sip a beverage of your choice. Realize you're talking to someone who thinks psychology is an exact science. Lower expectations for intelligence accordingly.

[Echonova]

Such is cognitive dissonanceI feel like you have learned a new word a couple weeks back and want to show us how shiny your new word is.


Because you've been using it a lot lately.


























I mean a lot.








































Still not impressed.

[Browning151]

I feel like you have learned a new word a couple weeks back and want to show us how shiny your new word is.


Because you've been using it a lot lately.


























I mean a lot.








































Still not impressed.

You forgot "empirical research".

[Echonova]

You forgot "empirical research".The empirical research data you have submitted shows cognitive dissonance in your reply.

[Browning151]

The empirical research data you have submitted shows cognitive dissonance in your reply.

Whoa, slow down chief, he's gonna have to google some new big words at the rate these are getting used up.

[Echonova]

Sorry you are struggling with your availability heuristic whilst trying to access a cognitive perspective. It will make the processes easier if you use me as the correlation coefficient. If we all just tried a little more Hozho perspective, perhaps we could all get along.

However unconscious inference will keep that from ever happening.

[Vteckidd]

Titty sprinkles