Robin Garr wrote:No criticism here, Alison. I think this issue really speaks more to larger businesses, the Yums and the Papas and all the rest whose execs take home seven-figure annual paychecks, the stockholders wallow in cash, and the employees go on food stamps.
Don't most of these regs exempt small businesses of fewer that 10 employees, though?
Doug Davis wrote:From 1982 to 2012 wages in the US economy in the mid 20's to mid 40's have only increased 5% over the course of 30 years. Let me say that again, a 5% pay raise in more than 30 years.
Mark R. wrote: While I certainly agree that it may not have overcome the rate of inflation it was certainly much more than 5% for the 30 years in question.
Mark R. wrote:I would certainly like to see the facts supporting this. While I certainly agree that it may not have overcome the rate of inflation it was certainly much more than 5% for the 30 years in question.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1983 and 2013 Annual Social and EconomicSupplements. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see <www.census.gov/prod/techdoc/cps/cpsmar13.pdf>.
Steve H wrote:In general, the states and locales that have implemented the most Democratic/liberal/progressive polices have the highest income inequities. The current Democratic party can best be understand as a coalition between the government dependent poor and the government crony ultra rich against the middle class. Everywhere their policies are ascendant the middle class contracts. Prime examples of this are New York City and San Francisco.
The minimum wage is just another one of these misguided policies that mostly hurts the groups that it claims to be helping, forcing even more people into dependence upon government aid. It would be justifiable to assume that this is the actual the goal, and not the often stated 'living wage' reasoning.
In the seven years after San Francisco increased its minimum wage in 2004, employment in the city grew by more than 5 percent while it fell in other Bay Area counties. Restaurant job growth was particularly strong, despite the strong opposition of large restaurant lobbying groups, increasing by 17.7 percent, faster than any other neighboring area.
The minimum wage is just another one of these misguided policies that mostly hurts the groups that it claims to be helping, forcing even more people into dependence upon government aid.
New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts — and often become even more attached to their beliefs. The finding raises questions about a key principle of a strong democracy: that a well-informed electorate is best.
Doug Davis wrote:You must not have read my post, at all. Specifically the part addressing San Francisco...In the seven years after San Francisco increased its minimum wage in 2004, employment in the city grew by more than 5 percent while it fell in other Bay Area counties. Restaurant job growth was particularly strong, despite the strong opposition of large restaurant lobbying groups, increasing by 17.7 percent, faster than any other neighboring area.
Doug Davis wrote:Please provide sources for your assertions. Especially this one:The minimum wage is just another one of these misguided policies that mostly hurts the groups that it claims to be helping, forcing even more people into dependence upon government aid.
Because I can find sources from university studies, to economic impact studies, to articles in The Economist who will give you the actual data to show you are wrong.
Doug Davis wrote:Of course there are also multiple university sociology and psychology studies which show that the more facts I show you, to show how wrong you are, the more you will double down on your beliefs and opinions in light of all the evidence to the contrary like its some religion or something.New research suggests that misinformed people rarely change their minds when presented with the facts — and often become even more attached to their beliefs. The finding raises questions about a key principle of a strong democracy: that a well-informed electorate is best.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =128490874
http://theconversation.com/why-facts-al ... ates-25094
Bill P wrote:"In general, the states and locales that have implemented the most Democratic/liberal/progressive polices have the highest income inequities."
In general, this is far from the case. The very bottom is a few red states and the top is a few blue. But, the vast majority of states in between the extremes are pretty much ideology blind. I even read one article that congratulated Mississippi as making the most progress against $$ inequality. Have you been to Mississippi lately? Mississippi exists so people in Alabama can feel better about themselves.
Seriously, although I have not dug into the numbers deeply, it is interesting that some of the states with the least inequality also seem to be among the least diverse...hmmm. I may be onto something there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U. ... oefficient
Users browsing this forum: AliBaba, Claudebot, SemrushBot and 1 guest