21-10-2004 03:36									#91
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

PS OH BY THE WAY Kerry loves the UN so much. And guess what, France, China, and Russia, all on the security council, were profiting in billions from Saddam's ripoff of the Oil For Food program.

At what point can you trust this bastard to run our country??

BRIBES FOR RUSSIA, FRANCE, GERMANY
BRATS WHO WANT TO BE LOVED IN RUSSIA, FRANCE, GERMANY
GEORGE BUSH
INVADING RUSSIA, FRANCE, GERMANY

	21-10-2004 03:48									#92
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I WIN

	21-10-2004 03:58									#93
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Another reaosn to vote for Kerry:

posters like Wiglaf

	21-10-2004 04:31									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

yes, Wiglaf is a good example of why to vote Kerry

	21-10-2004 04:43									#95
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf I WIN

Sore losers

	21-10-2004 06:25									#96
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I think that if you were to talk to Mary Cheney, who is a lesbian, she would tell you to vote for Kerry.

	21-10-2004 07:01									#98
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I'm starting to waver in my support for a third party candidate. I'm a flip-flopper .

I'm now thinking of voting Kerry.

What I ask of my fellow democratic poly members is this (remember I'm in a swing state- I could decide the next president ). In another thread people were saying raising the minimum wage is almost always followed by economic expansion.

If someone will provide proof of this (independant sites not associated with loonie liberal sites) I will promise to vote for John Kerry.

I am voting tomorrow, so get cracking.

	21-10-2004 07:15									#99
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

You're an egotistical dillusional who knows nothing about economics. Who gives a crap about your vote. If it carries any weight, might as well let a cow pick the next president.

Edit to add. No hard feelings. I am merely describing your vote

Last edited by Wiglaf on 21-10-2004 at 07:21

	21-10-2004 07:16									#100
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf You're an egotistical dillusional who knows nothing about economics. Who gives a crap about your vote. If it carries any weight, might as well let a cow pick the next president.

I asked a democrat for their opinion.

edit

	21-10-2004 07:17									#101
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: In another thread people were saying raising the minimum wage is almost always followed by economic expansion.

It's a case of correlation not leading to causation. Usually the min wage gets raised when a boom starts (because they figure why not, the economy is getting better, let's give more to the lower end guys) and then when the boom continues they say, look it's the result of the raise in min wages.

	21-10-2004 07:19									#102
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

http://www.swlearning.com/economics...se_minimum.html

	21-10-2004 07:24									#103
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Edit to add. No hard feelings. I am merely describing your vote

That sounds like something I'd say... thank god you have more posts than me!

	21-10-2004 09:09									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf PS OH BY THE WAY Kerry loves the UN so much. And guess what, France, China, and Russia, all on the security council, were profiting in billions from Saddam's ripoff of the Oil For Food program.

So was Cheney when he ran Haliburton.

	21-10-2004 09:12									#105
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Of course, we don't have a perfectly competitive labor market, so min wage increases are fine. They put more money in the hands of the working poor who spend it, which raises demand for products, which means more people need to be hired. Increasing demand always leads to higher employment.

	21-10-2004 09:15									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Of course, we don't have a perfectly competitive labor market, so min wage increases are fine. They put more money in the hands of the working poor who spend it, which raises demand for products, which means more people need to be hired. Increasing demand always leads to higher employment.

do you have any studies to show this though?

That's all I'm asking for. I'm voting tomorrow. It's between the libertarian candidate or Kerry. If Kerry raised the minimum raise to $7 (which I doubt he can do) and this can improve the economy, then I will support him. Keep in mind I normally hate socialism (the reason I never vote democrat). But minimum wage isn't socialism.

	21-10-2004 09:19									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

This from a man who used to call himself a socialist.

I have no studies. Just use some logic. What happens when you put more money in the hands of people who spend 100% of their paychecks? It works the same as a tax cut on the poor. They spend it and it boosts the economy.

The counter, however, is that small businesses claim they can't employ as many people. Your labor demand doesn't go down just because your costs go up, however. It's like increased gas costs, you just have to pay it. It's true, they might delay hiring new people, at least until business picks up, which it will quickly as all the poor workers start spending more.

	21-10-2004 09:21									#108
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara This from a man who used to call himself a socialist. I have no studies. Just use some logic. What happens when you put more money in the hands of people who spend 100% of their paychecks? It works the same as a tax cut on the poor. They spend it and it boosts the economy. The counter, however, is that small businesses claim they can't employ as many people. Your labor demand doesn't go down just because your costs go up, however. It's like increased gas costs, you just have to pay it. It's true, they might delay hiring new people, at least until business picks up, which it will quickly as all the poor workers start spending more.

I would be a socialist if I thought it could work. I mistankly thought it could work at one time. Some of you make a good argument for it.

	21-10-2004 09:22									#109
	Suffering from ads?

I'll look for a study, Diss, but Che's logic is spot-on. Our economy at this point is driven by consumer spending. One reason that tax cuts for the wealthy don't work very well as economic stimulators is that the wealthy already have all the money they need for consumer products; when their given tax cuts, they don't spend more.

But you give someone who's making $5.15 a raise to $7.00 and you know what? They're not going to save that extra $1.85. They're going to take that extra money -- maybe $40/week after taxes -- and buy some new clothes, or more food, or maybe just new cds, or eat out more, or go to the movies instead of watching tv, or whatever. They're going to put it right back into the consumer economy, where it will do the most good.

	21-10-2004 09:26									#110
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That raise may also lose them a job when business (and not just small ones) will decide to carry less employees because labor costs have gotten too high.

	21-10-2004 09:31									#111
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui That raise may also lose them a job when business (and not just small ones) will decide to carry less employees because labor costs have gotten too high.

And Imran does have a point.

I'm union and we have good wages. but because we get paid so much, the employer tries to keep the number of engineers to a minimum. We are understaffed and expected to do more work than we can handle. we have 15 engineers now. When they were non union they had like 40.

Higher wages = less employees.

	21-10-2004 09:33									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

There was a quantitative study done in NJ ~1991 on fast food employment, which showed positive employment. The methodology was shaky. I can't remember which journal it was in. American Economic Review I think.

Anyway most economists still view increasing the minimum wage as detrimental. I don't think the impact will be that great though. If it goes to $7/Hr

	21-10-2004 09:34									#113
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Check ot this list of richest and poorest states, from another thread:

quote: Here's a look at the top ten poorest US states: 1. Mississippi 2. Arkansas 3. Utah 4. New Mexico 5. West Virginia 6. Louisiana 7. South Carolina 8. Oklahoma 9. Kentucky 10. Alabama Mississippi being the poorest. Here's a look at the top ten richest US states. (DC included, because it counts in the electoral college.) 1. District of Columbia 2. Connecticut 3. New Jersey 4. New York 5. Massachusetts 6. Maryland 7. Hawaii 8. Nevada 9. Alaska 10. Illinois

Now check out this map -- http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm -- of which states have minimum wage laws higher than the federal minimum. Notice anything?

	21-10-2004 09:35									#114
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

MH: Yeah, later looks at the study showed shaky methodology on that original study, such as testing restaurants in PA (for comparison) which were owned by the same franchisee.

	21-10-2004 09:36									#115
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Now check out this map of which states have minimum wage laws higher than the federal minimum.

Correlation and causation problem? I'd argue that richer states decide to give higher min wage rather than a higher min wage leading to richer states.

	21-10-2004 09:37									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Dissident And Imran does have a point. I'm union and we have good wages. but because we get paid so much, the employer tries to keep the number of engineers to a minimum. We are understaffed and expected to do more work than we can handle. we have 15 engineers now. When they were non union they had like 40. Higher wages = less employees.

Maybe in a particular business, but not in the economy as a whole. Minimum wage raises have never corrolated with overall job loss in the economy.

	21-10-2004 09:39									#117
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Now check out this map of which states have minimum wage laws higher than the federal minimum. Correlation and causation problem? I'd argue that richer states decide to give higher min wage rather than a higher min wage leading to richer states.

Except that if higher minimum wages caused people to lose their jobs, as you claim, then high-wage states wouldn't also be rich, because they'd be rife with unemployment...

	21-10-2004 09:50									#118
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui That raise may also lose them a job when business (and not just small ones) will decide to carry less employees because labor costs have gotten too high.

I acknowledged this in my post, and then pointed out that as demand increases after min wage is raised, so will the demand for labor.

	21-10-2004 09:51									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Dissident we have 15 engineers now. When they were non union they had like 40.

Maybe your union should get off its ass and demand more engineers.

Anyway, your job isn't comparable to min wage work.

	21-10-2004 09:53									#120
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Except that if higher minimum wages caused people to lose their jobs, as you claim, then high-wage states wouldn't also be rich, because they'd be rife with unemployment...

You seem to ignore a Hell of a lot of other factors in play. I've heard either you or che say use common sense, but raising the price of min wage labor (if a good portion of the economy is at min wage) through government mandate, instead of the market, would obviously raise labor costs and result in less hiring of those people. And basic economics will verify it... when you set a floor which is above the supply/demand equilibrium, you will have a shortage, which is unemployment.

The rich states can afford to have a high min wage, because if their min wage was at the federal level, the market would have most jobs higher than that (as happened all around during the 90s, where McDonalds, of all people, payed a $1 higher than the min wage for employees). The poor states, OTOH, will have problems because their work market isn't as dynamic or as intelligent (because of inferior schools), which is another reason they are poor. Rich states can afford a higher min wage because of the fact they are rich. That doesn't mean that an increase in fed min wage is going to end up decreasing unemployment.. the roundabout reasoning to get to that reminds me of the justification for supply-side economics.