Michigan considers $10 minimum wage

[Frisivisia]

War is good for the economy because it's mass spending in a short amount of time. Which is, you know, good for the economy in the short term.

Yeah, you run the danger of getting a war based economy, where you have to continue war or massive military spending in order to maintain the economy. Sound familiar...

That's why you don't go to war all the time. Spending massive amounts of money in short periods of time is good for getting out of recession, but you have to stop and let the economy get back up and running. Then you regulate and tax and provide services, and there you go, stable economy.

[Augarundus]

Then gas the un(der)employed. We would have no labor problems then, I assume, and no welfare-warfare state to pay for.

Given that every news station tells me that the only two things that matter in an economy are employment and the stock market, we'd all be rich, right?

Actually welfare states function most effectively with low unemployment and become unsustinable with very high unemployment i.e. like is happening in Greece,etc. There are nations with zero or negliable unemployment, but there will always be periods of unemployment since we have state economics.

wat

I'm not disagreeing with the fact that welfare states require high employment for funding (that consumption requires production), but I don't see how that's a response to my joke at all.

I facetiously suggested that we could reduce unemployment (net consumption in a welfare state, btw) by killing the unemployed. Because employment is hyped up to be such a big deal by the media, this reduction in the unemployment statistic would save the economy. The joke is that employment doesn't really matter and that we should analyze economic health by production of consumer goods, capital accumulation, etc. (that shipping people overseas during WWII and digging and filling ditches in the Great Depression didn't solve anything because it only decreased unemployment, which you could just as easily do through mass murder).

[Agymnum]

Because reducing unemployment is SO BAD, am I right?

Let those worthless bastards rot in the street!

Will you watch your fucking tone with me?

Reducing unemployment by killing over 60 million people and causing immeasurable injury and property damage is bad, yeah.

You support it, which means, using your own bullshit fucking "debate" tactics, I can now claim that you support global genocide.

Sick fuck.

I'm not going to watch my fucking tone. As long as I don't insult you I can say whatever I goddamn like on these forums.

And thanks for drawing the strawman. I mean, clearly wanting to reduce unemployment is equitable to reducing the minimum wage to zero.

Clearly.

[Welstonia (Ancient)]

If the Great Depression had gone on longer and people had felt the sting of poverty longer, communism would have had a better shot.

If anything I'm a bit annoyed that FDR's policies actually reduced unemployment. Otherwise we might be living in a glorious socialist/communist state - the first one ever with actual political freedoms (you know, unlike the USSR and China under Mao).

I have to disagree, the change to Communism has to be very very slow, because it requires a massively different way of thinking. (more akin to Native American philosophies)

[The New Sea Territory]

If you are that left wing, I'm calling you socialist. I don't give a shit.
And No. Liberty is Liberty. Both Social and Economic.

If you don't give a shit, why the fuck are you debating on a political forum?

Start giving a shit, or maybe we should start classifying you as "that edgy guy who doesn't know dick about politics and real life".

So your going to take my comment out of context, then ignore all the ACTUAL POLITICAL posts I put up? And I'm the edgy one? I'm the one who doesn't know about politics, when I know the only good thing I've ever seen modern leftism do is promote gay rights?

[Frisivisia]

Because reducing unemployment is SO BAD, am I right?

Let those worthless bastards rot in the street!

Will you watch your fucking tone with me?

Reducing unemployment by killing over 60 million people and causing immeasurable injury and property damage is bad, yeah.

You support it, which means, using your own bullshit fucking "debate" tactics, I can now claim that you support global genocide.

Sick fuck.

Flaming is against the rules on this forum. Please stop.

War is bad. You don't win the argument because war is bad and also happens to be a sometimes necessary way of stimulating the economy.

[Occupied Deutschland]

No, it didn't. All WWII did was reduce unemployment.

Tends to happen when you send a bunch men to Europe and the Pacific to fight, and women to build planes, bombs and tanks

But life was not an improvement. The civilians at home their food rationed, and consumer choices limited. Life was measurably worse, even if you had no loved ones fighting in the war.

That's the price of total war. However, the post-war period was incredibly prosperous because all of the GIs were home, educated, and with money and jobs created from the stimulation of the economy via the government.

Bullshit.

The post-war period became incredibly prosperous in America because America could sell its goods to the WORLD because we were the only industrialized country that didn't get BUTTFUCKED in the war. (Well, besides Canada but they don't really count). No competition meant we prospered pretty well and good.

[Shallowell]

Thirded. Zero unemployment! (In theory)

Yeah, cause you could essentially enslave people.

No... Because only the people that would be willing to work for that price would work.

[New Rogernomics]

Constructions that did nothing to big. Seriously, they were filler jobs. They just paid people little money for meaningless jobs doing labor. They didn't stimulate anything. WW2 did the stimulating.

No, it didn't. All WWII did was reduce unemployment.

Tends to happen when you send a bunch men to Europe and the Pacific to fight, and women to build planes, bombs and tanks

But life was not an improvement. The civilians at home their food rationed, and consumer choices limited. Life was measurably worse, even if you had no loved ones fighting in the war.

America had a short term monopoly on production due to the fact that their major competitors in Europe and elsewhere had war damage to their manufacturing sector and economy. When those jobs were drying up the American economy failed to move away from manufacturing quick enough, resulting in unemployment.

[Agymnum]

If anything I'm a bit annoyed that FDR's policies actually reduced unemployment. Otherwise we might be living in a glorious socialist/communist state - the first one ever with actual political freedoms (you know, unlike the USSR and China under Mao).

I have to disagree, the change to Communism has to be very very slow, because it requires a massively different way of thinking. (more akin to Native American philosophies)

True, but my point was that FDR saved the capitalists. They should be thankful - instead they spit on his name and claim his policies nearly destroyed this country.

[Imperiatom]

Higher taxes are the reason it has become worse here, Has made it more attractive to evade tax by legal means for the rich. Our current government is doing their best with increasing the income tax threshold and reducing the top rate, and business rates. My fear is one, given the state of the world economy it is too late. And two those socialists will get back in power make tax avoidance more attractive again, and stealth tax the fuck out of the bottom 75% of earners as they don't have the means of protecting their money as the rich can. ( free advice for anyone listening, never invest in France as they tax all foreign investments)

Tax rates for the wealthy have fallen drastically for the wealthy here. Taxes are not the problem, at least not here. It's privatization and "free trade"

Thatcherism Works, over here term in office she increased welfare spending every year and shrank government spending as a percentage of GDP through privatization. My father was perfectly happy to pay 40% income tax but when it went up to 50% he was just "fuck this". I am of the same mind, i am a social conservative but there is a point where the level of taxation is just stupid and goes against all economic conventions. To my mind that must be somewhere in between 40-50% as a top rate.

[Sibirsky]

Look mate, you cannot force (at least not yet) businesses to pay more for labor than they can afford, based on revenue from those employees.

If I have a whole bunch of minimum wage guys working for, say I am paying them $7.

All of them generate more than $7 for me, or they would not have their jobs. Some generate $15 or more. I am keeping and promoting these guys.

Some more generate $11-$12. Keepers.

Some are only generating $8-$10.

Minimum wage goes up to $10. You expect me to pay some guy $2 an hour out my pocket as an act of charity? What?

And the least productive, the worst off employees are the ones that get hurt by these policies.

I see your hypothetical and raise you actual data.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412

Data that has been addressed, numerous times, in this very thread.

[Welstonia (Ancient)]

Yeah, cause you could essentially enslave people.

No... Because only the people that would be willing to work for that price would work.

It works sooo well in Germany doesn't it?

[Occupied Deutschland]

Will you watch your fucking tone with me?

Reducing unemployment by killing over 60 million people and causing immeasurable injury and property damage is bad, yeah.

You support it, which means, using your own bullshit fucking "debate" tactics, I can now claim that you support global genocide.

Sick fuck.

I'm not going to watch my fucking tone. As long as I don't insult you I can say whatever I goddamn like on these forums.

And thanks for drawing the strawman. I mean, clearly wanting to reduce unemployment is equitable to reducing the minimum wage to zero.

Clearly.

And here I thought neo-cons were the war-mongers and the most I had to fear from Socialists was economic policies I disagreed with. Guess I was wrong.

[Frisivisia]

If you don't give a shit, why the fuck are you debating on a political forum?

Start giving a shit, or maybe we should start classifying you as "that edgy guy who doesn't know dick about politics and real life".

So your going to take my comment out of context, then ignore all the ACTUAL POLITICAL posts I put up? And I'm the edgy one? I'm the one who doesn't know about politics, when I know the only good thing I've ever seen modern leftism do is promote gay rights?

And Marijuana legalization. And paying women equal amounts, but that's bad because regulation is bad. And fighting against unnecessary war. And fixing the economy, but wait, that's bad because it requires actual knowledge of what happens in the economy, not bullshit theory and hypotheticals.

[Agymnum]

If you don't give a shit, why the fuck are you debating on a political forum?

Start giving a shit, or maybe we should start classifying you as "that edgy guy who doesn't know dick about politics and real life".

So your going to take my comment out of context, then ignore all the ACTUAL POLITICAL posts I put up? And I'm the edgy one? I'm the one who doesn't know about politics, when I know the only good thing I've ever seen modern leftism do is promote gay rights?

And safety regulations in businesses.

And education for the poor/disadvantaged.

And universal healthcare.

[The New Sea Territory]

I have to disagree, the change to Communism has to be very very slow, because it requires a massively different way of thinking. (more akin to Native American philosophies)

True, but my point was that FDR saved the capitalists. They should be thankful - instead they spit on his name and claim his policies nearly destroyed this country.

No. I have a dart board with his picture on it, next to the Obama symbol with a hammer and sickle over it and my anarchist flag. All throughout the apartment. Fun to practice; I think I'm a good thrower with such incentive.

[Frisivisia]

I see your hypothetical and raise you actual data.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412

Data that has been addressed, numerous times, in this very thread.

Took you long enough to come up with a pitiful excuse for a non-answer. Would you care to refute the data?

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412

[Welstonia (Ancient)]

Tax rates for the wealthy have fallen drastically for the wealthy here. Taxes are not the problem, at least not here. It's privatization and "free trade"

Thatcherism Works, over here term in office she increased welfare spending every year and shrank government spending as a percentage of GDP through privatization. My father was perfectly happy to pay 40% income tax but when it went up to 50% he was just "fuck this". I am of the same mind, i am a social conservative but there is a point where the level of taxation is just stupid and goes against all economic conventions. To my mind that must be somewhere in between 40-50% as a top rate.

You don't even know how low taxes are hear do you?

[Frisivisia]

True, but my point was that FDR saved the capitalists. They should be thankful - instead they spit on his name and claim his policies nearly destroyed this country.

No. I have a dart board with his picture on it, next to the Obama symbol with a hammer and sickle over it and my anarchist flag. All throughout the apartment. Fun to practice; I think I'm a good thrower with such incentive.

You're so edgy.

[Welstonia (Ancient)]

True, but my point was that FDR saved the capitalists. They should be thankful - instead they spit on his name and claim his policies nearly destroyed this country.

No. I have a dart board with his picture on it, next to the Obama symbol with a hammer and sickle over it and my anarchist flag. All throughout the apartment. Fun to practice; I think I'm a good thrower with such incentive.

Obama is the biggest fucking capitalist ever. How you people think he is a socialist I do not understand.

[Agymnum]

True, but my point was that FDR saved the capitalists. They should be thankful - instead they spit on his name and claim his policies nearly destroyed this country.

No. I have a dart board with his picture on it, next to the Obama symbol with a hammer and sickle over it and my anarchist flag. All throughout the apartment. Fun to practice; I think I'm a good thrower with such incentive.

I see you spend your free time wisely.

[The New Sea Territory]

Thatcherism Works, over here term in office she increased welfare spending every year and shrank government spending as a percentage of GDP through privatization. My father was perfectly happy to pay 40% income tax but when it went up to 50% he was just "fuck this". I am of the same mind, i am a social conservative but there is a point where the level of taxation is just stupid and goes against all economic conventions. To my mind that must be somewhere in between 40-50% as a top rate.

You don't even know how low taxes are hear do you?

In the US? Uh....40-50% for upper class. That's a shit ton of institutionalized theft.

[Sibirsky]

No, it didn't. All WWII did was reduce unemployment.

Tends to happen when you send a bunch men to Europe and the Pacific to fight, and women to build planes, bombs and tanks

But life was not an improvement. The civilians at home their food rationed, and consumer choices limited. Life was measurably worse, even if you had no loved ones fighting in the war.

That's the price of total war. However, the post-war period was incredibly prosperous because all of the GIs were home, educated, and with money and jobs created from the stimulation of the economy via the government.

Don't forget the destruction of the rest of the industrialized world. That sort of helps too.

[Shallowell]

No... Because only the people that would be willing to work for that price would work.

It works sooo well in Germany doesn't it?

What do you mean by this?