Economy Right wing economic theory BTFO again.

[panamaican]

Its a problem with a national minimum wage. Let the states decide like I said. Your not supposed to be able to have a mortgage and a car payment in an entry level position that takes no skills. People think you are for some reason.

That didn't address what I said. What I said is that the minimum wage worker should not be expected to take a lower salary just because the IT worker has decided to do so.

Now I'm reading a completely different argument from the previous post. The first post said that a minimum wage worker should not make as much as an entry level IT worker. Now, the argument says a minimum wage worker should not be able to afford a mortgage and a car. Neither of those arguments are about if the minimum wage salary is appropriate or not.

The first argument judges the minimum wage salary by increases or declines in some unrelated field. If that was valid, we should peg the minimum wage to some percentage of IT workers.

The second argument states what minimum wage workers should not be able to buy. That's an empty argument (see - minimum wage workers should not be able to have a private jet or a gold pinkie ring) - there is no explanation for why. The proper argument is "What should they able to afford?"

In fact, "What should they be able to afford?" is the specific question that is rarely answered concretely.

 

[Crom Cruach]

Does the right wing even have an economic policy, besides "cut taxes"?

Yes you dummy.

They also sell State assets into private ownership so they can be farmed for profits.

... And award taxpayer funded State contracts to political donors without proper pricing or efficiency oversights.

Quick, Quick, look over there, it's a communist and they want to die your babies hair purple.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

This same excuse has been used for years. If these "small town businesses" are on such a knife edge of failure that an increase to payroll will outweigh a slight price increase they could implement and more people eating there, they shouldn't be used as an economic "canary in the coal mine", they're half dead already.

How are you factoring "more people eating there?'

 

[Joe]

Does the right wing even have an economic policy, besides "cut taxes"?

Forcing the rich to pay the actual taxes they owe is communism

 

[SammyPops]

this was all over the news here prolly b/c the dude is Canadian born, but on equestion is how does all them poor people buying stuff made by other poor people not cause inflation?

 

[cooks1]

So, when you put all these militant stipulations on the big money, and the big money fucks off, where does the money come from to pay for your utopia?

Just asking.

From that absurd comment, I am guessing it will come as a surprise to you that corporations, despite being more profitable than ever, are paying an ever smaller share of Federal tax revenue. In the mid 1940's to mid 1960's, pretty healthy economic times all things considered, 30%-35% of all federal revenue was from corporate income tax. That % today is 7%. That's right, only 7% of Federal revenue came from corporate income tax.

What a joke your comment is. Who exactly is this 'big money' that's going to 'fuck off'? Big money is not paying jackety shit in taxes. In fact, they are likely getting money from the government despite being profitable.

https://itep.org/55-profitable-corporations-zero-corporate-tax/

Just these 55 companies got a 3.5 Billion refund on pre tax income of over $40 Billion.

You really think us jacking corporations is the problem here?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Ok, but TS should update the link to include the original study or have a better detailed break down in the OP. I dont even think he read the link he posted.

Maybe. The news is the overdue recognition IMO. Not news that economists now realize that small MW increases don't negatively affect employment.

 

[Jack V Savage]

this was all over the news here prolly b/c the dude is Canadian born, but on equestion is how does all them poor people buying stuff made by other poor people not cause inflation?

???

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Maybe. The news is the overdue recognition IMO. Not news that economists now realize that small MW increases don't negatively affect employment.

Sure, ok. But the reason i ask if they updated any information from 1980's is because we can bring new advancement variables since then; namely automation. This study shows the link between MW increases, non skilled workers, automation and job losses.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23667?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw

". Based on CPS data from 1980-2015, we find that increasing the minimum wage decreases significantly the share of automatable employment held by low-skilled workers, and increases the likelihood that low-skilled workers in automatable jobs become nonemployed or employed in worse jobs. The average effects mask significant heterogeneity by industry and demographic group, including substantive adverse effects for older, low-skilled workers in manufacturing. We also find some evidence that the same changes improve job opportunities for higher-skilled workers. The findings imply that groups often ignored in the minimum wage literature are in fact quite vulnerable to employment changes and job loss because of automation following a minimum wage increase."

Again, TS should have spent more time detailing the point we was trying to make in the OP.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Sure, ok. But the reason i ask if they updated any information from 1980's is because we can bring new advancement variables since then; namely automation. This study shows the link between MW increases, non skilled workers, automation and job losses.

https://www.nber.org/papers/w23667?utm_campaign=ntw&utm_medium=email&utm_source=ntw

". Based on CPS data from 1980-2015, we find that increasing the minimum wage decreases significantly the share of automatable employment held by low-skilled workers, and increases the likelihood that low-skilled workers in automatable jobs become nonemployed or employed in worse jobs. The average effects mask significant heterogeneity by industry and demographic group, including substantive adverse effects for older, low-skilled workers in manufacturing. We also find some evidence that the same changes improve job opportunities for higher-skilled workers. The findings imply that groups often ignored in the minimum wage literature are in fact quite vulnerable to employment changes and job loss because of automation following a minimum wage increase."

Again, TS should have spent more time detailing the point we was trying to make in the OP.

Neumark is probably the most well-known MW skeptic, but the differences are more a result of emphasis (as your quote shows). Very possible that some subsets of MW workers see a negative impact even while unemployment is not negatively impacted overall (meaning job switching). However, the automation point strikes me as a reason to support rather than oppose higher MW. Like, higher labor productivity without higher unemployment? Seems win-win.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Neumark is probably the most well-known MW skeptic, but the differences are more a result of emphasis (as your quote shows). Very possible that some subsets of MW workers see a negative impact even while unemployment is not negatively impacted overall. However, the automation point strikes me as a reason to support rather than oppose higher MW. Like, higher labor productivity without higher unemployment? Seems win-win.

It depends who is winning. I agree with your point in that the study showed automation increases job opp for higher skilled workers and thats a benefit. However, for low skilled, i dont see the win. Unless you think people will actually support redistribution of wealth to the bottom rungs who lack any ability to be useful in the job market.

 

[ShadowRun]

It's so surreal watching conservatives complain about the ultra rich, giant corporations, and the eroding middle class, and then turn around and defend the economic policies that created those things.

Because they generally don’t like the government taking their tax money and screwing up the spending over and over and wanting more money from people.

 

[ShadowRun]

The economic isn't tanking, genius. GDP growth this year will be the strongest we've seen in decades, and it'll be very strong next year at least, too.

Pretty sure that’s because a recovery from CV19

 

[Jack V Savage]

It depends who is winning. I agree with your point in that the study showed automation increases job opp for higher skilled workers and thats a benefit. However, for low skilled, i dont see the win. Unless you think people will actually support redistribution of wealth to the bottom rungs who lack any ability to be useful in the job market.

Well, low-skill workers overall aren't losing their jobs. People in certain jobs are switching to other ones, while productivity is rising, which increases wages in the longer run. So everyone is winning (that's what "win-win" means).

 

[Jack V Savage]

Pretty sure that’s because a recovery from CV19

Sure, though the U.S.'s recovery is particularly strong, in part because our policy response this year has been particularly good. However you look at it, it's a false statement that the economy is tanking or that a political party is causing it to tank. I believe that we should strive to only make true statements, even if it upsets hacks.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Well, low-skill workers overall aren't losing their jobs. People in certain jobs are switching to other ones, while productivity is rising, which increases wages in the longer run. So everyone is winning (that's what "win-win" means).

The study shows low skill people who are switching jobs due to automation, down grade to a lower paying job. So i am not clear on how non skilled people who are being phased out are winning.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The study shows low skill people who are switching jobs due to automation, down grade to a lower paying job. So i am not clear on how non skilled people who are being phased out are winning.

What do you understand "minimum wage" to mean?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

What do you understand "minimum wage" to mean?

The lowest compensation per hour as determined by the government. Whats your point?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

What do you understand "minimum wage" to mean?

edit

 

[MoparOrNoCar]

The economic isn't tanking, genius. GDP growth this year will be the strongest we've seen in decades, and it'll be very strong next year at least, too.

You were on here over 6 months ago saying inflation was of no worry and was not going to happen when it was clear as day to everyone else that it was going to be an issue moving forward.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You were on here over 6 months ago saying inflation was of no worry and was not going to happen when it was clear as day to everyone else that it was going to be an issue moving forward.

Never said inflation won't happen. It always happens. Not a problem, though. I'm going to win the bet I made about it, and I'd be happy to make a bet with you on growth if you genuinely believe the economy is tanking.