[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Holy fucking shit.
You’ve been told, over and over, my experience and knowledge base isn’t limited to tax.
[/quote]
You have to understand , a person 34 years old is going to have limited experience , I respect your knowledge about tax code but when you discuss the recent past you think because you find an article to says the same as you want to say that is gospel . I am sure I am as guilty as you but I have my past experiences to go on and they total 57 years
@ Beans just some food for thought my Daughter is 2 years older than you . I respect her opinion a lot . But I would not listen to any revisionist history from her either . So don’t take my opinions personally and believe me when I tell you I have ZERO butt hurt 
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ Beans just some food for thought my Daughter is 2 years older than you . I respect her opinion a lot . But I would not listen to any revisionist history from her either . So don’t take my opinions personally and believe me when I tell you I have ZERO butt hurt :)[/quote]
You are acting like a god damn moron here.
If a 20 year old with 12+ years of education and experience in auto repair told me I needed XY & Z done on my car, I’m not going to argue and talk out of my ass about how much older than him I am, because I’m smart enough to understand my limitations, and humble enough to admit people have more knowledge and experience than me in many areas.
Business happens to be an area where my education and experience trumps your butthurt ramblings about how old you are.
Setting aside how it will affect employers, what exactly is supposed to happen to those who make min wage? Obviously they will make a little more money but how will it really change their lives? If they are getting foodstamps they will probably still get them, for example. I watched (and listened to) a speech from Obama and he said one result of people making more money (although it should be qualified with “a little”) is that they will spend more money thus help the economy. I don’t get it.
If the idea is that people making the current min wage need more money so they can spend more money then how will that help them? They will still be as poor or broke as they are now but only with more stuff. Shouldn’t the idea be that they can save some money? They can maybe start investing in an IRA or a college fund for their kids or maybe be able to go to school themselves and learn a trade or get a degree?
I don’t know, maybe they could move to a better neighborhood with better schools for their kids. Maybe it’s just me but all I hear about with raising min wage is that it will only serve to make those people a little bit better at being consumers.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Setting aside how it will affect employers, what exactly is supposed to happen to those who make min wage? Obviously they will make a little more money but how will it really change their lives? If they are getting foodstamps they will probably still get them, for example. I watched (and listened to) a speech from Obama and he said one result of people making more money (although it should be qualified with “a little”) is that they will spend more money thus help the economy. I don’t get it.
If the idea is that people making the current min wage need more money so they can spend more money then how will that help them? They will still be as poor or broke as they are now but only with more stuff. Shouldn’t the idea be that they can save some money? They can maybe start investing in an IRA or a college fund for their kids or maybe be able to go to school themselves and learn a trade or get a degree?
I don’t know, maybe they could move to a better neighborhood with better schools for their kids. Maybe it’s just me but all I hear about with raising min wage is that it will only serve to make those people a little bit better at being consumers.
[/quote]
Bingo.
This is one of many problems I have with raising the minimum wage–it doesn’t actually help the people its supposed to help, not even in the way you mentioned above. They will be marginally less stretched, and then they will spend that money either on bills or stuff they don’t need instead of saving (been there done that) until the price increases catch up with the wage hike and they’re back at square one completely.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Setting aside how it will affect employers, what exactly is supposed to happen to those who make min wage? Obviously they will make a little more money but how will it really change their lives? If they are getting foodstamps they will probably still get them, for example. I watched (and listened to) a speech from Obama and he said one result of people making more money (although it should be qualified with “a little”) is that they will spend more money thus help the economy. I don’t get it.
If the idea is that people making the current min wage need more money so they can spend more money then how will that help them? They will still be as poor or broke as they are now but only with more stuff. Shouldn’t the idea be that they can save some money? They can maybe start investing in an IRA or a college fund for their kids or maybe be able to go to school themselves and learn a trade or get a degree?
I don’t know, maybe they could move to a better neighborhood with better schools for their kids. Maybe it’s just me but all I hear about with raising min wage is that it will only serve to make those people a little bit better at being consumers.
[/quote]
Spot on.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Setting aside how it will affect employers, what exactly is supposed to happen to those who make min wage? Obviously they will make a little more money but how will it really change their lives? If they are getting foodstamps they will probably still get them, for example. I watched (and listened to) a speech from Obama and he said one result of people making more money (although it should be qualified with “a little”) is that they will spend more money thus help the economy. I don’t get it.
If the idea is that people making the current min wage need more money so they can spend more money then how will that help them? They will still be as poor or broke as they are now but only with more stuff. Shouldn’t the idea be that they can save some money? They can maybe start investing in an IRA or a college fund for their kids or maybe be able to go to school themselves and learn a trade or get a degree?
I don’t know, maybe they could move to a better neighborhood with better schools for their kids. Maybe it’s just me but all I hear about with raising min wage is that it will only serve to make those people a little bit better at being consumers.
[/quote]
In the short term it will allow them to buy more stuff. But then, as prices rise to offset the additional cost of labor, the purchasing power of those few extra dollars an hour will erode back to where they are today. Fast food joints, convenience stores, grocery stores, etc will all raise their prices. Women and children will be hit the hardest.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
In the short term it will allow them to buy more stuff. But then, as prices rise to offset the additional cost of labor, the purchasing power of those few extra dollars an hour will erode back to where they are today. Fast food joints, convenience stores, grocery stores, etc will all raise their prices. Women and children will be hit the hardest.
[/quote]
Not if prices are regulated by the government of the United State.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
In the short term it will allow them to buy more stuff. But then, as prices rise to offset the additional cost of labor, the purchasing power of those few extra dollars an hour will erode back to where they are today. Fast food joints, convenience stores, grocery stores, etc will all raise their prices. Women and children will be hit the hardest.
[/quote]
Not if prices are regulated by the government of the United State.[/quote]
For the most part they aren’t directly. The Fed is however ensuring inflation which erodes the purchasing power of the dollar which equates to higher prices so in effect they are. God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. Wall Street won’t allow that to happen though.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
For the most part they aren’t directly. The Fed is however ensuring inflation which erodes the purchasing power of the dollar which equates to higher prices so in effect they are. God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. Wall Street won’t allow that to happen though.
[/quote]
Why can’t the United State just control all aspects of the economy? It should be able to produce goods, set their prices, determine who gets what, etc., right?
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth. [/quote]
Considering what the last thirty years have been like, I wouldn’t mind trying a decade or so myself.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth. [/quote]
It’s my understanding that inflation should only be pushed by demand.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth. [/quote]
I believe he was referring to the inflation created by the Federal Reserve…if you’re also talking about that inflation, how is it ever a good thing? How does the devaluation of your wealth help you build wealth?
*it appears cwill had already responded to this by the time my post went through.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth. [/quote]
Considering what the last thirty years have been like, I wouldn’t mind trying a decade or so myself.
[/quote]
I hear you, but decade is a long time, lol.
I’m trying to think which generation would get boned by that the most… Near retirement, or the youth that miss out on prime earning years.
And I guess you can take solace in the fact we would likely be in a deflationary period right now. Given the sheer amount of money pumped into the system right bow by QE, and only moderate inflation… Without QE we’d be at the very least flat.
[quote]NickViar wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
For the most part they aren’t directly. The Fed is however ensuring inflation which erodes the purchasing power of the dollar which equates to higher prices so in effect they are. God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. Wall Street won’t allow that to happen though.
[/quote]
Why can’t the United State just control all aspects of the economy? It should be able to produce goods, set their prices, determine who gets what, etc., right?[/quote]
If you want a grossly inefficient marketplace, ala Communist Russia, China, etc., then sure. There is simply no way any central planning authority can anticipate or know what people across America could want or need. It is impossible in any theoretical or practical way. Only a free market can efficiently react to the wants and needs of a population as vast as ours.
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
If you want a grossly inefficient marketplace, ala Communist Russia, China, etc., then sure. There is simply no way any central planning authority can anticipate or know what people across America could want or need. It is impossible in any theoretical or practical way. Only a free market can efficiently react to the wants and needs of a population as vast as ours.
[/quote]
But…voting…and democracy…and…and other things!
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cwill1973 wrote:
God forbid we have deflation which would allow the average consumers dollar to go farther. [/quote]
Deflation isn’t really a good thing either.
Short periods of it, fine, but long term, you want some marginal inflation, else very few people would ever be able to do things like own a home or build any sort of wealth. [/quote]
It’s my understanding that inflation should only be pushed by demand.
[/quote]
I’m not advocating for government created inflation. I’m saying, over time, marginal inflation is better than long tracks of deflation.
You are going to have one of the two. Inflation is the better option. And in an as close to free market as possible, the reactions to inflation should keep it in check. (However, humans being humans, we fuck it up in the short term, long enough time line and it works itself out.)
[quote]NickViar wrote:
if you’re also talking about that inflation, how is it ever a good thing? How does the devaluation of your wealth help you build wealth?
[/quote]
Your thinking within, a very small I might add, box. Think outside of it.
Man & Wife buy a home in 1950. Land is a scarce resource so the value will always go up on a long enough timeline. In 1950 they mortgage $20,000 for the home. In 2010 when they die, their home is worth $200,000.
Without marginal inflation they would have likely never been able to pay off the debt in the first place, let alone passed that much of a windfall to their kids.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Your thinking within, a very small I might add, box. Think outside of it.
Man & Wife buy a home in 1950. Land is a scarce resource so the value will always go up on a long enough timeline. In 1950 they mortgage $20,000 for the home. In 2010 when they die, their home is worth $200,000.
Without marginal inflation they would have likely never been able to pay off the debt in the first place, let alone passed that much of a windfall to their kids. [/quote]
Items obviously grow more valuable as they become more scarce. If that’s what you were talking about, then everybody here is on the same page. cwill was talking about artificial inflation.