|
Wark Say posted:I'm surprised that Trump being disrespectful wrt fallen soldiers is not a bigger deal, taking into account how gung-ho some republicans can be about the military. I know this is from like, 10 pages ago but
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:It is a very real concern that increasing the minimum wage too quickly I don't think anybody is advocating increasing it particularly quickly, and there's little chance that it would successfully get pushed through if it increased the minimum wage too hastily. For it to pass through Congress, it's pretty much going to have to entail a very gradual increase.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
"Decorum" is just more PC bullshit that says you can't just let the spirit take over and do whatever you want to!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TheDailyEdge/status/869353326969794561Ice Phisherman posted:
I'm extremely concerned...about this strange feeling I'm having 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I see we've now come all the way around from "You can't trust what they say, look at what they do" to "You can't trust what they've done, listen to what they say". Actually, it's, "If Perez believes this stuff, he needs to say it loudly and proudly, because the Democratic base really loving needs to be unified and energized." I know you think Perez's accomplishments in the DOL should speak for themselves, but they really don't. They would if he seemed at all proud of the economic justice milestones on his record, but he seems content to hide those under a bushel, and behave like an economic conservative. That's not exactly inspiring.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Also irrelevant because minimum wage increases larger than a couple dollars are phased in over a period of years anyway so just do that. An immediate increase to $15/hour for large cities would probably be very doable, maybe less so in rural areas but I'm not sure. A phased increase beyond that would also probably work just fine. Jumping the gun and going directly to $20-23/hour across the country might be moving too fast. We don't have empirical data because no one's ever tried it, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something to be done. Let's start with a solid but modest increase to $15, with pegs to inflation and cost-of-living for large cities, and see if we can raise it beyond that down the road, because the consequences for getting it wrong are that we'll never be able to do it again.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Wanting politicians in the party of the people to support the people in word as well as deed? How outrageous.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
Vaishino posted:I know this is from like, 10 pages ago but It is the duty of every real American to post that picture in response to any GOP member talking about how much they support the troops.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
PT6A posted:An immediate increase to $15/hour for large cities would probably be very doable, maybe less so in rural areas but I'm not sure. A phased increase beyond that would also probably work just fine. Jumping the gun and going directly to $20-23/hour across the country might be moving too fast. We don't have empirical data because no one's ever tried it, sure, but that doesn't mean it's something to be done. Let's start with a solid but modest increase to $15, with pegs to inflation and cost-of-living for large cities, and see if we can raise it beyond that down the road, because the consequences for getting it wrong are that we'll never be able to do it again. That's fine with me. I'm objecting to people insisting that a $23 wage that actually reflects the increase in productivity, which should belong to all of us rather than just to CEOs and investors, can never work because *handwave* economic reality. I'm fine with phasing in any increase just in case, just not with taking $20 off the table immediately because it vaguely sounds like too much. I'm sure there's a number that's too much, but we have no idea what it is, only that conservative economists are always telling us it's magically equal to whatever the minimum wage is right now and any increase must be *dire*, ignoring all the times they said that before and it didn't happen.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
  I know the_donald is mostly bots at this point but I can't imagine how many frustrated young white men have bought into literal Nazi ideology because of that place. gently caress the reddit admins for keeping it around.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:whats the good reasons? (honest question, happy to be pointed at longer reads if you cant be bothered summarizing) I'm not an economist, but I'll try. Though I'm sure others could do it better than me. I may not also be perfectly correct so if someone disagrees please correct me. I'd point you towards better reads but I haven't read anything recent that I can vouch for. These are off the top of my head, but I have thought about this for a few years. Take it as you will. I'll list reasons why one should think about increasing minimum wage and then talk about why these things could turn sour or even devastating with minimum wage pinned to a fixed number that increases. Not will, but could. 1. Increased wages get people off government assistance. Wal-Mart for example is notorious for showing employees how to get government benefits for example. Government subsidizes business not paying their employees living wages. If you can increase minimum wages you get people off the government teat and that tax money can be spent elsewhere. Not that these programs are bad. They're social safety nets, but they've gone far beyond being a net one falls into and gets back up from in some cases. Sustained and generational poverty are their own conversation, but paying a living wage gets people off stuff like food stamps and section eight housing. 2. Increased wages at the poorest level get spent. This is a mix of good and bad. Money has a sort of velocity and money that moves at a stable pace is good for the economy. These people might go for the conspicuous consumption like cars or houses or clothes they can't afford, but they also buy beans and butter. Staple foods. That sort of stuff. Increased spending power by the poor will be inflationary, but how much depends on said purchasing power. Money that does not flow at all causes recessions or even depressions. Everyone hoards, no one spends, jobs that were necessary become unnecessary because no one is buying. Money moving faster helps prevent these freezes. Not perfectly, but better than nothing. 3. Education funding is highly tied to property taxes. If taxes are low because opportunity is too little Johnny doesn't get school supplies, a working and well repaired school, teachers worth a drat and class sizes small enough that kids can't slip through the cracks (as easily). Little Johnny also has a full belly because his parents can afford food and free school lunches aren't his one guaranteed meal of the day. See one. High property taxes mean good schools, smaller class sizes and better teachers. Also better education for children is a long term good for the nation, its people and its economy. Little Johnny grows up and creates the next Google. Or at least he becomes a pretty kick rear end researcher or businessman despite growing up poor. He's also less likely to be illiterate, as the effective literacy rate in America is only 85%. Education creates opportunity, and really exists are the only universal means to solving problems that were previously unsolvable with dumber people. 4. Americans won't be as devastated from a missed paycheck or job loss. Most Americans have less than a thousand dollars in the bank. Something to the effect of 75%. This has to do with our terrible spending habits and living up to and beyond our means instead of within or below them, but it also has to do with poverty. Can't save if you're living hand to mouth. Live hand to mouth long enough and survival mode becomes a mindset. 5. Pegged to five. When you're living hand to mouth you can't save for the future. I don't know about you, but most millennials I know don't plan to retire, or if they do the most common means is suicide. Not even in a dark humor sort of way. That's it. They choose to retire when they eat a bullet or down a bottle of pills. With increased wages you can begin to save. You can breathe and think about the future rather than your empty fridge and unpaid bills. Going shorter term than retirement saving for the future also means being able to get adequate medical treatment or being able to look for a better job or training for a better job because you can use your saved money as a cushion. All of these reasons above during a time of stability don't get steadily worse though as inflation goes up. Parents can still feed their kids and pay their taxes and all that good poo poo this year the same as ten or twenty years from now. In theory. Things aren't always stable though. All of these reasons I listed above? poo poo goes out of control if there's a period of rapid inflation. The money supply does actually get added to in a process called fractional reserve banking (Link for you. Read about it. It's cool.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking However, we can outrun our supply of money if the minimum wage is pegged to a fixed amount. Let's say we have a bad year with stagflation. A stagnant or even shrinking GDP and a period of inflation. Let's say it goes up over 15% in a year. It's happened before during the Carter administration for example. Money supply begins to dry up even with FRB as it can't keep up. Everything costs more and prices raise on goods and services while simultaneously there isn't enough money to pay people with or buy that gallon of milk. A full financial panic would be made worse not only by us acting irrationally both before and after, but add to it all low paid labor going up in costs all at once on top of the panic. It'd be a nightmare for businesses. As the panic increases it'll drive up more and more low, but not minimally low paid labor. And like a wave it'll carry more people upwards. What do you do then about wages? You can't deflate your currency because then no one will want to spend because money will be worth more if they just hold onto it. So you're stuck with a ton of people at minimum wage despite many of them being worth more than that and able to demand a higher wage. Businesses would go out of business because of the sudden shock. I can't even begin to think about this scenario properly because I'm not an economist. It's just one scenario. It's bad news if it ever happens. Essentially what I'm saying is that pinning minimum wage to inflation can be a good thing, but it drastically reduces flexibility in setting monetary policy. Also try finding the political will to unpin it during a full blown financial crisis. The voters will murder the party that does it. Possibly literally. No one party or congressman or congresswoman will want to fall on that grenade. It'll be the party that cares less that benefits. On another note on top of this no matter how little or much minimum wage goes up if it goes up it will increase the rate of use, investment and research into automation. It's already happening and will continue to happen, but a fifteen dollar minimum wage will crank that poo poo up fast while a nine or ten dollar minimum wage will have a lower impact. Again, pinning that wage to inflation increases the rate of this investment as businesses look to get rid of personnel that they could offload to a robot or algorithm because they don't need to pay robots. They pay for robots. This means less jobs. Finally, like I said before, less jobs. Raising minimum income and pinning it to inflation can reduce the amount of jobs. Businesses will automate, but they'll also find ways to be more efficient and that means less spent on labor. Or they'll simply close down due to being unprofitable. Businesses like stability and they want a lot of it and for long periods of time. Businesses being unable to control costs means that they'll be even more risk averse and will hire less people. Again, this isn't perfect. I may have glaring holes in my logic as my disciplines were political science and sociology, but there would be some serious drawbacks to pinning minimum income to inflation. I'm against it. I think there are better ways of going about it that maintain flexibility with monetary policy. The problem is getting politicians to address it before it becomes a problem.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Prediction: a minimum wage that's an actual living wage won't be supported until large swathes of the population are out of work due to automation and it seems attractive to have an army of low skilled laborers rather than a nation of vloggers on UBI
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Yeah if the billionaire class are forced to deal with reality they might just crash the whole economy out of spite, so we better do what they say. Realistically, the only way to take our country back for actual honest to goodness real people is to legislate massive changes to the way things work. Then we'll see how toothless their economic threats really are. I'm sure they'd rather have 1 less yacht than be drug from their mansion by an angry mob of peasants and killed. Then again, we won't know unless it's tried. They might be that stupid. Welcome to late stage capitalism, buckle up.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:51
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:Part of that plan involves raising it to 15 over several years. Let it creep up and give Almighty Job Creators time to adjust. Because goddammit, if we can't get exactly what we want then getting nothing but keeping purity is just as good! Thats what we learned in 1993, and look how it led to easily passing single payer in 1997! Paracaidas posted:We cool, I'm just fed up enough with the current state of campaign finance that it irrationally irritates me when I see misinformation about it (as if "corporate corruption" is new or symptomatic of a certain type of D) But it does help explain things not being perfect and awesome without ever having to consider "Maybe you can't just push the special button labelled Full Communism Now, maybe these things take effort and consistent uninterrupted power", so the far left will never ever give it up. hi liter posted:Younger, leftist people are mocked and driven from Democratic party institutions with great enthusiasm. There's a reason DSA is swelling with new members. Dumbfucks who don't want to compromise their purity by actually getting anything done? GreyjoyBastard posted:I truly and sincerely hate Sessions, but normalizing executing one's political enemies is not a road we should ever go down. Why the gently caress not? Trump already normalised it in the campaign, he just never went through on it cause he knew that they could never make a case against Hillary unless propaganda was admissible as evidence. Deadly Ham Sandwich posted:gently caress no. drilldo squirt posted:Never. Spiffster posted:Hah how about no and Wow, you three must really hate a guaranteed basic income.Since, you know, Leftists always vote solely on policy.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
quote:"We will have to convince the American people to convince Mark," a spokesperson for the PAC said in an email, noting that 2020 is still awhile away." duterte did the same thing basically why is the guy who is totally not running for president doing presidential campaign things
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Because goddammit, if we can't get exactly what we want then getting nothing but keeping purity is just as good! Could you please stop strawmanning? Nobody is advocating this.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:57
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Wanting politicians in the party of the people to support the people in word as well as deed? How outrageous. Majorian posted:Actually, it's, "If Perez believes this stuff, he needs to say it loudly and proudly, because the Democratic base really loving needs to be unified and energized." I know you think Perez's accomplishments in the DOL should speak for themselves, but they really don't. They would if he seemed at all proud of the economic justice milestones on his record, but he seems content to hide those under a bushel, and behave like an economic conservative. That's not exactly inspiring. Tom Perez posted:If the price of a burger goes up 5 cents and the minimum wage that you have received is going up from $7.25 to $15 an hour – and there have been a number of studies that document just how much the price of a burger might go up if you increase the minimum wage. You match the costs, and the benefits far outweigh the costs The Prospect, regarding Perez posted:Perez was out in front on the Fight for 15 long before others saw its potential, understanding early on that the campaign wasn’t about raising the federal minimum wage, but rather creating momentum at the state and local levels and putting pressure on private-sector employers to boost wages. “The Fight for $15 is more than a number,” Perez has said. “This is a movement for fairness and voice.” Tom Perez, on Trump's Budget posted:Looking out for his friends on Wall Street at the expense of Main Street Maine's ROC posted:ROC United applauds Senator Bernie Sanders and Democratic National Committee Chair, Tom Perez for voicing their support for One Fair Wage in Maine. Prior to passage of the Ballot 4 initiative, tipped workers in Maine made just $3.75 per hour. This forced them to rely on tips to make ends meet. As a result, they faced disproportionate rates of poverty and sexual harassment. As leading progressive voices, Sanders and Perez have made clear that the Democratic Party endorses One Fair Wage But why won't he speak up? 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jackallisonLOL/status/868180458076606464/video/1 i look forward to a health care policy crafted around my genetic faults
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
IDK that Zuckerberg would make a good or bad president because I don't think he's ever put out any tangible policies or platforms but I think the amount of influence he would have in an election is so terrifying that he should be barred from running.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
cult member at airport posted:
They got a whole 25k sigs for whatever Dumbfuck petition they wanted, so that appears to be thier rough membership. Not the millions or whatever they claim
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Could you please stop strawmanning? Nobody is advocating this. There's a whole goddamn thread where this is the center of the circle jerk. Support a minimumwage under 13$? Sociopath!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
cult member at airport posted:
Silicon Valley...... was a mistake
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Spiffster posted:That is true... has any country done something similar to see a real world example? Just curious I don't think so. The dollar isn't really pinned to anything save for faith in the US economy. It's not backed by stuff that can be directly exchanged for money, or at least something which that money is always directly worth like gold. Since this is about history this is more in my wheelhouse so I can give a better explanation. Imagine you're a country that relies on gold as what your currency is backed by. You know that in a pinch you can exchange that currency for that gold and vice versa. However that supply can stolen or destroyed. Can be insufficient for the needs of your country and cause a money shortage. You can suddenly find a vast supply of gold rendering your money worth less because you now have double the amount of gold you did before. This means that you don't have full, or at least greater control over your monetary policy if the money you have is not simply worth what it is. Whats a dollar worth? It's worth that dollar. It's not pegged to anything. All of those problems above? About supply? They're not problems in this system because the physical item that it's backed by doesn't exist. As long as the faith in the US economy persists that dollar is worth something despite it being pegged to nothing. The problem that now has to be managed is now faith in the US economy. And while it's hard, you're not suddenly dealing with your economy collapsing because Fort Knox got hit with a dirty bomb and your gold is now all irradiated. However, and though the analogy isn't perfect and I am getting past my wheelhouse and back into economics again, but the dollar would once again be pegged to something. It wouldn't be a physical item like gold. Instead would be pegged to labor and labor, unlike gold, doesn't have a more or less universally accepted price. It would be fixed on human service and that is not a constant anywhere. It's never been done before (to my knowledge) and I don't think it's a smart idea to peg the dollar to labor. I have no idea what would happen if you pegged the dollar to US labor. I don't think anyone else does either. Somehow that doesn't inspire confidence in me. Ice Phisherman fucked around with this message at 05:06 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:But why won't he speak up? That's some pretty weak tea there. Despera posted:There's a whole goddamn thread where this is the center of the circle jerk. Support a minimumwage under 13$? Sociopath! Which thread is that? I'm not seeing anything like that. People saying that $13 isn't nearly enough, sure, but that's hardly out-of-bounds. It's certainly not the flat-out refusal to compromise that Fulchrum claims - if anything, left-Dems have been very willing to compromise for decades.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
guys just give the billionaire tech baron who has donated to various republican campaigns that favored deregulation, is head of a company with diversity issues and is poo poo at enforcing other countries' anti-hate-speech laws, and has no public service record to speak of a chance
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:I don't think so. The dollar isn't really pinned to anything save for faith in the US economy. It's not backed by stuff that can be directly exchanged for money, or at least something which that money is always directly worth like gold. Since this is about history this is more in my wheelhouse so I can give a better explanation. lmao so having a minimum wage increase means that you think that the dollar will, rather than being backed by the full faith of the us government, be pegged to labor my friend, do you understand the difference between "currency" and "wages" they are in fact two (2) different things
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's some pretty weak tea there. Seeing how you are a major poster in the "full communism now" thread maybe you missed it.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Despera posted:Seeing how you are a major poster in the "full communism now" thread maybe you missed it.  A quarter of my family died in the Gulag, dude. I'm hardly "full Communism now." Most people in that thread aren't that, either. I am a socialist though, if that's what you were thinking!
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
Rodatose posted:guys just give the billionaire tech baron who has donated to various republican campaigns that favored deregulation, is head of a company with diversity issues and is poo poo at enforcing other countries' anti-hate-speech laws, and has no public service record to speak of a chance sounds like ideological purity to me
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
stone cold posted:lmao so having a minimum wage increase means that you think that the dollar will, rather than being backed by the full faith of the us government, be pegged to labor You didn't catch what I wrote. Minimum wage increase does not peg the dollar to labor. Pegging inflation to minimum wage increase creates a strong link between labor and the dollar. It's not the increase of minimum income exactly, but having inflation increase how much a ton of people in the US get paid. We'd be back to days like, but not exactly like having gold backing our currency again. Like I said, it's not a perfect analogy, but it would cause problems. I can't really describe it properly because I don't think the term exists for pegging money to labor instead of stuff like gold or faith.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:Until Bernie the far left was horribly underrepresented. ... bernie's not the far left
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
Yeah, people like Jill Stein are probably the real far left.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:... bernie's not the far left That kind of underlines his point, though, doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:... bernie's not the far left Furthest left that's represented in politics anyway. Not a lot of anarchists, communists and such get represented at the state or federal level.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:
So did a good portion of mine and? doesn't stop any of the idiots in that thread going "Stalin gave communism a bad name".
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Ice Phisherman posted:You didn't catch what I wrote. Minimum wage increase does not peg the dollar to labor. Pegging inflation to minimum wage increase creates a strong link between labor and the dollar. Ice Phisherman posted:However, and though the analogy isn't perfect and I am getting past my wheelhouse and back into economics again, but the dollar would once again be pegged to something. It wouldn't be a physical item like gold. Instead would be pegged to labor and labor, unlike gold, doesn't have a more or less universally accepted price. It would be fixed on human service and that is not a constant anywhere. It's never been done before (to my knowledge) and I don't think it's a smart idea to peg the dollar to labor. 🤔 Also, I think the point you're missing again is that you can harp on all about inflation all you like, but wages have been stagnant in the face of inflationary pressures for, oh, roughly 44 years give or take So if your concern is inflation, like lmao I'm glad you took macro 101 but you missed a few key ideas
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That kind of underlines his point, though, doesn't it? the far left is like represented in Rojava and that's about it these days
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:16
|
|
|
If Bernie isn't the far left, nobody of importance exists in that area.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
stone cold posted:🤔 I 100% agree that wages need to go up. I agree that wages have been stagnant for a long, long time. I just don't want wages to be pegged to inflation is all. So what's your take on it then? Why should or should not minimum wage be pegged to inflation? What key ideas did I miss since you're pointing them out.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:IDK that Zuckerberg would make a good or bad president because I don't think he's ever put out any tangible policies or platforms but I think the amount of influence he would have in an election is so terrifying that he should be barred from running. To which I say "gently caress that." The right already has a terrifying amount of influence on discourse and political thought in America and use it exclusively for evil. If you don't want to use a bigger club to beat them to death with, then you aren't treating their continued existence as the massive problem it is. Majorian posted:That's some pretty weak tea there. Majorian posted:Which thread is that? I'm not seeing anything like that. People saying that $13 isn't nearly enough, sure, but that's hardly out-of-bounds. It's certainly not the flat-out refusal to compromise that Fulchrum claims - if anything, left-Dems have been very willing to compromise for decades.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:20
|
|