Chef Jim Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 Like raising taxes on smokes? Which created a black market for smokes and the raised minimum wage will most likely create a black market for employment which of course already exists today.
DC Tom Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 Which created a black market for smokes and the raised minimum wage will most likely create a black market for employment which of course already exists today. And just like the ACA is creating a black market for medicine... ...well, not really, not yet. But I'm sure that, given that it inhibits the government's ability to regulate medical practices and health care usage and "control costs", I'm sure "direct-to-doctor" payment arrangements outside of approved health insurance polices, like I have with my doctor, will be considered "black market" medical practices within five years or so.
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 Which created a black market for smokes and the raised minimum wage will most likely create a black market for employment which of course already exists today. Additionally, I'd be interested on seeing numbers on how percentage of the illegal cigarette trade is being thwarted by police action in NYC and how that translates to tax dollars saved vs. how much is being spent on the police actions.
Tiberius Posted December 5, 2014 Author Posted December 5, 2014 Additionally, I'd be interested on seeing numbers on how percentage of the illegal cigarette trade is being thwarted by police action in NYC and how that translates to tax dollars saved vs. how much is being spent on the police actions. Vs the public health benefits of reduced smoking
TH3 Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 “By eliminating those jobs, you would be eliminating the experience that a first job provides and teaching a work ethic.” Why would jobs be eliminated? Has this happened in states where the MW has been raised significantly? Have businesses closed? “If the MW goes up, won't all payroll taxes also increase? So the big winner in this entire discussion is the government.” Wouldn’t a big winner in this case be our children as the deficit would get reduced? I think a big aspect not talked about is the earned income tax credit. The US taxpayer is essentially supplementing a large portion of MW workers by giving them money for working at MW jobs – so in essence – the economy is already supporting a higher MW just in a very convoluted way – and in essence giving companies like Walmart a huge subsidy.
IDBillzFan Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 Vs the public health benefits of reduced smoking Yeah, we've seen the health benefits of high taxes on cigarettes. His name was Eric Garner.
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 And just like the ACA is creating a black market for medicine... ...well, not really, not yet. But I'm sure that, given that it inhibits the government's ability to regulate medical practices and health care usage and "control costs", I'm sure "direct-to-doctor" payment arrangements outside of approved health insurance polices, like I have with my doctor, will be considered "black market" medical practices within five years or so. Of course they will. Those sorts of markets have already emerged in every country with government care. Vs the public health benefits of reduced smoking Non-sequitor. I made no comment regarding the level of taxation. I'm not a NYC resident, so I really don't care what the local government there does. The comment that I made was that I'd be interested in seeing ROI's on combating illegal cigarette sales. My hunch is that they're spending more on enforcment than they're saving.
Rob's House Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 (edited) “By eliminating those jobs, you would be eliminating the experience that a first job provides and teaching a work ethic.” Why would jobs be eliminated? Has this happened in states where the MW has been raised significantly? Have businesses closed? “If the MW goes up, won't all payroll taxes also increase? So the big winner in this entire discussion is the government.” Wouldn’t a big winner in this case be our children as the deficit would get reduced? I think a big aspect not talked about is the earned income tax credit. The US taxpayer is essentially supplementing a large portion of MW workers by giving them money for working at MW jobs – so in essence – the economy is already supporting a higher MW just in a very convoluted way – and in essence giving companies like Walmart a huge subsidy. Take a company that pays the average worker above minimum wage - say $10/hr. You think you can Jack his labor cost up 50% without serious adverse effects? And this "earned" tax credit business and it's de facto "subsidy" of Wal Mart's is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm all for testing the theory. Let's do away with it and see if its absence forces Wal Mart to raise wages. Edited December 5, 2014 by Rob's House
TH3 Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 “Take a company that pays the average worker above minimum wage - say $10/hr. You think you can Jack his labor cost up 50% without serious adverse effects?” My point is – You speak without back up – We have states – Oregon – that have raised the MW appreciably – was this then accompanied by a reduction in employment and closing of businesses? – Are you just speaking from a political point of view or have you done actual research to back up your points? “And this "earned" tax credit business and it's de facto "subsidy" of Wal Mart's is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm all for testing the theory. Let's do away with it and see if its absence forces Wal Mart to raise wages.” I don’t believe that it would force Walmart to do anything – they already pay as low as they can. What it would do would be to put 10’s of millions of citizens who work full time into abject poverty. US society has already decided that minimum wage is not enough to maintain a household at levels we can live with so we supplement and reward them for working by paying them with the EIC. The EIC is – BTW – a GOP favorite as it rewards people to actually maintain employment. http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/cepr-blog/2014-job-creation-in-states-that-raised-the-minimum-wage 2014 Job Creation Faster in States that Raised the Minimum Wage - Per Goldman Sachs
GG Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 “Take a company that pays the average worker above minimum wage - say $10/hr. You think you can Jack his labor cost up 50% without serious adverse effects?” My point is – You speak without back up – We have states – Oregon – that have raised the MW appreciably – was this then accompanied by a reduction in employment and closing of businesses? – Are you just speaking from a political point of view or have you done actual research to back up your points? “And this "earned" tax credit business and it's de facto "subsidy" of Wal Mart's is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm all for testing the theory. Let's do away with it and see if its absence forces Wal Mart to raise wages.” I don’t believe that it would force Walmart to do anything – they already pay as low as they can. What it would do would be to put 10’s of millions of citizens who work full time into abject poverty. US society has already decided that minimum wage is not enough to maintain a household at levels we can live with so we supplement and reward them for working by paying them with the EIC. The EIC is – BTW – a GOP favorite as it rewards people to actually maintain employment. http://www.cepr.net/...he-minimum-wage 2014 Job Creation Faster in States that Raised the Minimum Wage - Per Goldman Sachs Keep watching the retail, hospitality and food service industry employment once ACA is fully kicked in and technology becomes more capable. As for the GS report, even the article's authors agree " While this kind of simple exercise can't establish causality, it does provide evidence against theoretical negative employment effects of minimum-wage increases." Nice caveat - yeah we know that we can't tie the causation to the correlation, but we're going to do it anyway. Wonder if you're the author of that piece.
Rob's House Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 “Take a company that pays the average worker above minimum wage - say $10/hr. You think you can Jack his labor cost up 50% without serious adverse effects?” My point is – You speak without back up – We have states – Oregon – that have raised the MW appreciably – was this then accompanied by a reduction in employment and closing of businesses? – Are you just speaking from a political point of view or have you done actual research to back up your points? “And this "earned" tax credit business and it's de facto "subsidy" of Wal Mart's is absolutely ridiculous, but I'm all for testing the theory. Let's do away with it and see if its absence forces Wal Mart to raise wages.” I don’t believe that it would force Walmart to do anything – they already pay as low as they can. What it would do would be to put 10’s of millions of citizens who work full time into abject poverty. US society has already decided that minimum wage is not enough to maintain a household at levels we can live with so we supplement and reward them for working by paying them with the EIC. The EIC is – BTW – a GOP favorite as it rewards people to actually maintain employment. To your first point - Show me a state that's ever doubled minimum wage, or even hiked it up 50% in a short period of time. I can't think of any. Common sense tells anyone who's ever managed a small business that a 50% hike in labor cost can, and in many cases will, be disastrous. I haven't recently reviewed minimum wage effects, but last time I did I know states like CA with high minimum wage laws had double digit unemployment while states like VA Who adhere only to Fed min wage laws were at full employment. To your second point - You're speaking primarily of people who don't exist. If we're going to start subsidizing responsible people who are perpetually stuck in minimum wage jobs should we not subsidize Santa Clause as well?
TH3 Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 (edited) To your second point - You're speaking primarily of people who don't exist. If we're going to start subsidizing responsible people who are perpetually stuck in minimum wage jobs should we not subsidize Santa Clause as well? Almost 30 million households received EIC in 2014 and EIC is the 3rd largest government subsidy (welfare) program. As I said – we are already paying more than the MW – just doing it through the government. Santa is subsidized by love from the children of the world! Edited December 5, 2014 by baskin
Rob's House Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 To your second point - You're speaking primarily of people who don't exist. If we're going to start subsidizing responsible people who are perpetually stuck in minimum wage jobs should we not subsidize Santa Clause as well? Almost 30 million households received EIC in 2014 and EIC is the 3rd largest government subsidy (welfare) program. As I said – we are already paying more than the MW – just doing it through the government. Santa is subsidized by love from the children of the world! I know and have known a lot of people on those programs. I've also worked with a lot of people who can't hold a job for more than 6 weeks because they have a horrible attitude and a feeling of entitlement. What I've never seen, or know of anyone else having seen, is a responsible person perpetually stuck in a minimum wage job. Not one.
Azalin Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 What I've never seen, or know of anyone else having seen, is a responsible person perpetually stuck in a minimum wage job. Not one. This X 2
DC Tom Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 What I've never seen, or know of anyone else having seen, is a responsible person perpetually stuck in a minimum wage job. Not one. I've seen one - my sister-in-law. Responsible, yes (she takes care of her 35-year old disabled son), but for a variety of reasons she's completely incapable of developing the skills necessary to progress from minimum-wage labor.
IDBillzFan Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 What I've never seen, or know of anyone else having seen, is a responsible person perpetually stuck in a minimum wage job. Not one. What you fail to understand is not all people are responsible. Not all people want to work. And it's not fair. Why should those who are responsible and want to work get all the good jobs? The only way to balance that out is to pay more money to the irresponsible deadwoods of the workplace.
Rob's House Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 I've seen one - my sister-in-law. Responsible, yes (she takes care of her 35-year old disabled son), but for a variety of reasons she's completely incapable of developing the skills necessary to progress from minimum-wage labor. From minimum wage or low wage? Can she really not get a job paying $12-15/hr, and if not is it due to her situation caring for her disabled son and/or some form of mental illness? What you fail to understand is not all people are responsible. Not all people want to work. And it's not fair. Why should those who are responsible and want to work get all the good jobs? The only way to balance that out is to pay more money to the irresponsible deadwoods of the workplace. That's really what I see from these arguments. Anywhere I've worked there have always been useless employees that wash out and no one feels sorry for them. But in liberal la la land they project some made up story upon the statistics that are those people, and buy and sell it as a story of the virtuous but unfortunate downtrodden. It's fantasy.
DC Tom Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 From minimum wage or low wage? Can she really not get a job paying $12-15/hr, and if not is it due to her situation caring for her disabled son and/or some form of mental illness? She really can't. Lots of factors go into it: part of it is lack of opportunity, since in Mickey Rat Land (Orlando) there's a relative imbalance between minimum wage and higher-paying jobs. But a big part of it is simply lack of education and lack of comprehension that she could get an education if she wanted to. It's a feature of growing up dirt poor - poor people tend to have fewer opportunities in large part because they are completely unaware that there ARE opportunities. I don't know that you can realistically call that lack of awareness and understanding a lack of responsibility - really, if you haven't seen it, you wouldn't believe that mindset could exist. "Dirt poor" tends to perpetuate itself because of it. And by "dirt poor," I mean "walked to school, three miles, in the dirt, with no shoes, and only ate for lunch what she could steal from the orange groves on the way to school." Literally. My wife has foot problems from growing up shoeless.
Rob's House Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 She really can't. Lots of factors go into it: part of it is lack of opportunity, since in Mickey Rat Land (Orlando) there's a relative imbalance between minimum wage and higher-paying jobs. But a big part of it is simply lack of education and lack of comprehension that she could get an education if she wanted to. It's a feature of growing up dirt poor - poor people tend to have fewer opportunities in large part because they are completely unaware that there ARE opportunities. I don't know that you can realistically call that lack of awareness and understanding a lack of responsibility - really, if you haven't seen it, you wouldn't believe that mindset could exist. "Dirt poor" tends to perpetuate itself because of it. And by "dirt poor," I mean "walked to school, three miles, in the dirt, with no shoes, and only ate for lunch what she could steal from the orange groves on the way to school." Literally. My wife has foot problems from growing up shoeless. I have seen it, and perhaps "responsible" isn't the best word for it, but it sums it up as well as any word I can think of. Her situation sounds more to me like a guy I know who is now living out of his car and pan handling because he can't hold a job due to emotional problems that prevent him from being ale to work with people. It's different because he has some marketable skills, but in neither case is a minimum wage hike a realistic or efficient solution. I'm not really sure how anyone who has ever worked, even at a minimum wage job, for any length of time can't see the opportunity to at least get to around the level they're talking about. Even if they grew up poor. If you're bagging groceries or flipping burgers for $7/hr is the opportunity of assistant manager or cashier really that elusive? It seems these issues run deeper than mere lack of opportunity.
KD in CA Posted December 5, 2014 Posted December 5, 2014 Anywhere I've worked there have always been useless employees that wash out and no one feels sorry for them. But in liberal la la land they project some made up story upon the statistics that are those people, and buy and sell it as a story of the virtuous but unfortunate downtrodden. It's fantasy. All those people were all treated unfairly or discriminated against and didn't get a fair shake. Every one of them. That's why we need a level playing field. You must be part of the 1%.
Recommended Posts