Offical 3rd & Final Presidential Debate Thread.

[Wezas]

And of course brought up the "nuisance" line within the first minute of talking.

[Wezas]

And bush has some spit on the left side of his mouth that's bugging the shit out of me.

[Alfster]

Am I the only one that noticed Kerry went a bit overboard on shaving his left eyebrow tonight?

Heh.

Edited because i'm a moron

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Alfster]

[Alfster]

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Alfster]

[4a6c1]

HAHAHAHAHA. Mr. President keeps getting a crazy grin on his face that reminds me of the look my creepy uncle gets when hes about to tickle some random child relative at a family reunion.

And that spittle is making me laugh too. Debates are so funny.

:lol2:

[Wezas]

I like this moderator. He doesn't give them the 30 additional seconds every time. Bush this last election was getting irritating when he was jumping out of his seat interrupting people.

[4a6c1]

Yeah. His face gets red and puffy when he gets going, like in the last one. Looks like someone made him take a class on facial expressions during a debate or something because hes not glaring at Kerry every time he speaks anymore. Unfortunately, he only learned the crazy grin and stupid smile expressions. Poor Mr. President. :(

Edited to add: I just realized I cant concentrate on the issues because there is too much to make fun of. And I keep laughing. Oh dear. Politics is not for me.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by JihnasSpirit]

[Wezas]

The one thing I've noticed in all 3 debates is Bush's "duh" face after/during every statement. Almost like he's saying "Geez, didn't you know that?" after every statement.

If I was undecided and basing my judgement on how they were talking to me - I would steer away from Bush. He seems to be talking down to people.

[Betheny]

wezas, you beat backlash to it -- CONGRATS!

Kerry said he'd fight for America now with the same passion he did as a young man. We are so fucking PWNED.

- Arkans

[Wezas]

So we learned that Kerry has a plan for America.

And Bush has a painting in the Oval Office.

and of course, idealogues (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=idealogues)

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Wezas]

[Hulkein]

Good debate overrall.

[DeV]

I liked this debate. Both came out throwing jabs.

This debate was more of the same. It won't cause any real changes, IMHO.

- Arkans

[Ravenstorm]

Kerry won.

Okay, now that that's out of the way... More seriously.

I'm not an economist nor an accountant. I have no idea how Kerry can promise to fund what needs to be funded and not raise taxes. And honestly? I don't care. If he can accomplish one half, or even a third, of what he said I'd be happy.

I don't know if Kerry can do what he says but I do know what Bush intends to do and what he already has done. As far as Bush is concerned, he's done and doing everything right. No; he has not. It's time for a change.

Aside from that, I think this was the best debate of them all.

Raven

[Hulkein]

I think we'll see Bush gets his best ratings from this debate out of the three. Obviously better than the first, more concise and compassionate than the second.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Hulkein]

[DeV]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
Kerry won.
Raven Agreed.

[Goldenranger]

I'll third the Kerry winning however I agree with Arkans that it probably won't change any of the polls. Both men were on top of their game tonight, although I was annoyed by the smirks and odd little laughs from the President

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm
If he can accomplish one halfI've got good news! Remember when he said no uninsured Americans? Wellll, turns out his plan will insure 25 some odd million of the 45 million uninsured Americans. And that's more than half! :D

I don't think there's a real "winner" in this debate, but NBC sure as hell got some points for following my orders and having a instant factcheck dealie afterwards. :up:

[Satira]

I think Kerry won because I'm voting for Kerry. I think Bush lost because I hate Bush.

Honesty, what a bitch.

[Seran]

That's not a look of irony you see, it's something completely different. In fact what it is, is the President listening to the person on the other side of his earpiece. Anyone else notice during his first question just how much and how long he paused. Way beyond drmatic, it only served to show just how stupid.. or corrupt he is. Down with President Dumbarse.



Originally posted by Wezas
The one thing I've noticed in all 3 debates is Bush's "duh" face after/during every statement. Almost like he's saying "Geez, didn't you know that?" after every statement.

[4a6c1]

No no, I'm going to defend my Mr. President. Thats his dumbass face. He dosnt know wtf is going on. :D

[Chelle]

Person voting for Kerry= Kerry clearly won the debate.

Person voting for Bush= Bush by far won the debate.

Fox News= Bush won yay!

Same ole same ole.

No one from either party would admit the other one won.

The End.

[Jenisi]

I loved how Bush said to the unemployed citizen's that lost their jobs to over sea’s persons working for a fraction of what they did "Now that your unemployed you can go back to school (practically acting like he is doing them a favor) I wish Kerry would have gone into how many people have degree's that lost their jobs to outsourcing.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Jenisi]

[Back]

Something must be wrong with every TV I watch, or radio that I listen to, because in every debate the president sounds and looks like a cross between Stuttering John and Urkel. What was with the half-smile half-frown? To his credit, when he does snap out of his near epileptic seizures long enough he can be convincing. And he does have a good-ole-Texas-boy warmth sometimes.

Really, when he speaks in broken sentances, and pauses, then makes odd noises, I cringe in embarrassment for him.

Kerry carries himself much more like a statesman, and I agree sometimes overly serious and long winded. Everyone needs to sell themselves, and I see Kerry having a hard time with “Oh, by the way, I was blessed by a shaman this morning.” Whether he just has a hard time from humility, or he is just not convinved of his worth himself? Hard to say.

I did like the end of this debate which started with Kerry finally giving the president some approval for his actions after 9/11. They both then went on about how politicians are too divided right now. They had a chance to agree on faith, and the support of their loved ones. Perhaps it was because they both felt the relief at the end of some pretty bitter debating. Whatever. But it was nice to see them both agree on some things, relax a little, and that went a long way in my eyes to improve both their characters.

I’m still perplexed, however, how anyone can not see Kerry as the right man for the job between the two.

[4a6c1]

I'm independent and dislike both of them, so heres my opinion.

I think Kerry didnt do as well as he did in the other debates and Bush did better than he's been doing. I fully expected him to crash and burn since it was all domestic but his lashing out at Kerry and sticking to the facts without losing his temper (for once) did him good for afirming those who are already voting for him and maybe even bringing in some conservative-like undecideds. He does horrible when he rambles. Im thankful he didnt tonight.

Kerry is an excellent debater and his strongest point is he dosnt get emotional while driving home his biggest points. I think that actually went against him tonight because he seemed more bland than usual. It was hard to fire him up. Even so, he answered almost every question without getting sidetracked...probably because he favors these issues.

I'd say it was a tie. And I'm still undecided, DAMNIT.

[CrystalTears]

I’m still perplexed, however, how anyone can not see Kerry as the right man for the job between the two.

Because of the two, I disagree with Bush's plans less. There are too many things on Kerry's agenda that I disagree with.

There are things I don't like about either one of them, but Bush is the one that I see as more sincere and geniune. Kerry comes off as fake to me.

But then, this is my opinion, just as you feeling that Kerry is the man for the job is your opinion. We'll just have to be patient to see who wins 20 days from now.

[Ilvane]

CT, what exactly is it that you think Bush is doing right? I'm curious, because I am having a real hard time coming up with much.

-A

[Jenisi]

I don't understand that either, when people tell me that we are better off now then we were 4 years ago... I'm extremely puzzled in their logic.

[CrystalTears]

I'll tell you some of the things that Kerry is doing that turn me off to voting for him:

Strong need to continue with affirmative action.
Not seemingly putting any restrictions on any type of abortions.
Incredible desire to increase minimum wage.
Plans to start bringing back troops in 6 months.. I think it's really premature.
Never saying how he plans to find all this money to do the things he says he'd like to do.
If I had to hear one more time how he was an gun-toting alter boy, I was going to puke.

Yeah, that's going to put me on the shit list around here, but I don't care. I don't like Kerry. Why are people just not accepting that? It's not like I'm the only American who does. At least half the world is going to vote for Bush! :lol:

[4a6c1]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
If I had to hear one more time how he was an gun-toting alter boy, I was going to puke.



:yeahthat:
:lol:

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by JihnasSpirit]

[Jenisi]

And the problem you have with raising minimum wage is......???

[Hulkein]

I am.

You also need to take into account what outside circumstances have come into play.

9/11, the recession he inherited, corporate scandals.

Raising minimum wage has adverse effects on the economy, dear.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Hulkein]

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Jenisi
And the problem you have with raising minimum wage is......???

It will promote inflation. Inflation may cause the loss of more jobs.

[4a6c1]

So anyone heard any poll results yet?

[Kitsun]

Minimum wage should be people's incentive to get an education and move into a better job.

Minimum wage contributes to pushing up a company's bottom line so American products are higher priced than foreign products.

[Jenisi]

The cost of living is rapidly rising, minimum wage hasn't risen in 7 years. You can't survive on 5.15 an hour.

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Kitsun
Minimum wage should be people's incentive to get an education and move into a better job.

Minimum wage contributes to pushing up a company's bottom line so American products are higher priced than foreign products.

Yep, that was Bush's point. Sure he didn't need to say "yey you unemployed people can go to school now!" but in a way he has a great point. Educate yourself and achieve something better. Raising the minimum will just keep people at the status quo and not try to achieve anything else. Besides, increasing it will cause companies to rethink their staffing expenses, which may cause them to fire some of them to compensate.

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by JihnasSpirit
So anyone heard any poll results yet?

They've actually been really even. In the mid 40's for both of them, leaning slightly towards Kerry by one or two percent.

[Jenisi]

Do you really think companies that pay $5.15 an hour do it because they can't afford to pay more? No, the people at the top just want bigger paychecks. Take fast food companies for example.

[Ravenstorm]

Educate themselves on a minimum wage that already doesn't keep up with the cost of living?

A higher minimum wage means less people will need less public assistance in order to survive. Less welfare, less food stamps and maybe they'll be able to put something aside.

Raven

[Alfster]

Originally posted by Jenisi
The cost of living is rapidly rising, minimum wage hasn't risen in 7 years. You can't survive on 5.15 an hour.

To be fair, you can't really live in 7 dollars an hour either.

[CrystalTears]

And you believe that raising the minimum wage will cure that?

Edit: That was in response to Jenisi, by the way. Y'all got in the way. :P

[Edited on 10/14/2004 by CrystalTears]

[Alfster]

Me, I'm against raising the minimum wage. I don't like inflation.

[Back]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by Kitsun
Minimum wage should be people's incentive to get an education and move into a better job.

Minimum wage contributes to pushing up a company's bottom line so American products are higher priced than foreign products.

Yep, that was Bush's point. Sure he didn't need to say "yey you unemployed people can go to school now!" but in a way he has a great point. Educate yourself and achieve something better. Raising the minimum will just keep people at the status quo and not try to achieve anything else. Besides, increasing it will cause companies to rethink their staffing expenses, which may cause them to fire some of them to compensate.

This sort of illustrates a point how bad our college tuition system is. Raising minimum wage even higher than 7/hour is not enough for someone trying to work to pay for a college tuition on top of the load of college in and of itself. So they can graduate with 20k debt and hopes of a 35k a year job?

[Jenisi]

It's a wonderful start.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Jenisi
The cost of living is rapidly rising, minimum wage hasn't risen in 7 years. You can't survive on 5.15 an hour.

Nor can you survive on 6 dollars an hour, and that would be a huge minimum wage increase.

What will happen is jobs will be lost.

[CrystalTears]

I honestly don't believe that increasing the minimum wage is the answer.

Bush's plan for college education:
Increase Student Financial Aid to Help More Students Afford College - More than 10.3 million students will be able to afford college through President Bush's record $73 billion in financial aid assistance - an increase of $25.9 billion, or 55 percent, over 2001. The President's plan will provide a record $12.9 billion investment in Pell Grants, a 47 percent increase over 2001, to help an additional one million students afford college.
Offer an Enhanced Pell Grant - The President will allow low-income students who take the rigorous high school curriculum required by the State Scholars program to receive up to $1,000 in additional Pell Grant funding, bringing the total maximum award up to $5,050.
Increase AmeriCorps Education Awards - The President is increasing to 75,000 the number of AmeriCorps members. Full-time members will receive an education award of $4,725 to pay for college or graduate school.
Reform Student Loans to Better Serve Students - The President will increase loan limits for first-year students from $2,625 to $3,000 and allow low-default schools more flexibility in loan disbursements.
Encourage Dual Enrollment - President Bush would provide $125 million in grants to serve as an incentive for community colleges to provide dual enrollment programs, which allow high school students to earn college credit and graduate in less time. In addition, he will provide incentives for states to make it easier for students to transfer credits earned at community colleges to four-year institutions.

John Kerry's plan for college education:
Make College Affordable For All And Expand Lifelong Learning
As president, John Kerry will offer a fully refundable College Opportunity Tax credit on up to $4,000 of tuition for every year of college and offer aid to states that keep tuitions down. And he will launch a new effort to ensure that all of our workers can get the technical skills and advanced training they need.

Um.. yeah.

[Back]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
I'll tell you some of the things that Kerry is doing that turn me off to voting for him:

Strong need to continue with affirmative action.
Not seemingly putting any restrictions on any type of abortions.
Incredible desire to increase minimum wage.
Plans to start bringing back troops in 6 months.. I think it's really premature.
Never saying how he plans to find all this money to do the things he says he'd like to do.

That dosen’t put you on my shit list, CT. It scares me more than anything.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Strong need to continue with affirmative action.
He said tonight that he is going to put effort into it so that it can soon be not necessary.

Not seemingly putting any restrictions on any type of abortions.
And his argument is when the life of the mother is in danger.

Incredible desire to increase minimum wage.It was $5 years ago when i was in high school. it's $5.15 now. I think $7 in several years is acceptable.

Plans to start bringing back troops in 6 months.. I think it's really premature.
Start bringing Some troops back. Another common misconception.

Never saying how he plans to find all this money to do the things he says he'd like to do.
Tax Break for the rich was $87 billion? Was that the figure I heard tonight? I'm not sure how much Kerry's plan will cost, but that seems like a start.

If I had to hear one more time how he was an gun-toting alter boy, I was going to puke.
Telling america that he's not anti-gun - just anti-assault weapon. He wouldn't need to if the Republicans weren't portraying him as a "take away our guns" candidate.


After saying all that. It's of course my view of what Kerry is for. Take it with a grain of salt, investigate it, throw up a hand at it. I just needed to get it off my chest.

[Kitsun]

Government interference in the pricing model for a company can only hinder its competitive ability.

Like it or not, we have a global economy. If competitive forces are shoving you out of a sector, then there is the choice of adapting or dying.

Why are companies outsourcing jobs? Because they can do the same thing elsewhere cheaper. Force them to pay yet more here? They'll just pick up and go. At that point, raise the minimum wage all you want, there won't be anyone here to pay it.

[TheRoseLady]

Originally posted by Ilvane
CT, what exactly is it that you think Bush is doing right? I'm curious, because I am having a real hard time coming up with much.

-A

This is exactly my sentiment. Oy! As Raven said - if Kerry can do HALF of what he says he will we'll be way better off than we are.

I was especially amused by how Bush totally bypassed the entire min wage issue and jobs. But what exactly are those "21st Century jobs?" Must be the ones at Walmart.

I also laughed over the vaccine question. Bush admitted that he was looking to Canada for help. :lol: Last debate he told us that he won't let us import medicine from Canada because of safety issues.

The most pathetic thing Bush said was when he jealously pointed out that McCain was supporting him for president. I burst out laughing.

I'm sure more will come to mind.

The crazed grin on his face was pretty funny.

[longshot]

Originally posted by Jenisi
And the problem you have with raising minimum wage is......???

Lots.

I will welcome you to the MS Paint school of economics...


http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/upload/Longshot/582.jpg

See, when you set an artificial price floor, more people want to work at the higher price.

Companies can't afford the higher price, so they offer less jobs.

So, you have a bigger applicant pool for less jobs.

The biggest outcome of this is discrimination. An employer can pick and choose who he or she wants to hire, and can turn away "ugly people".

This is one of the big reasons for unemployed minority youth.

Raising the minimum wage is actually a terrible, terrible idea.

[Back]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
Bush's plan for college education:
John Kerry's plan for college education:


Looks to me like under Bush’s plan, only students who excell get help which I don’t disagree with... but even then, not as much help as with Kerry’s. On top of that, Kerry’s applies to everyone.

[Edaarin]

At least they didn't bullshit about outsourcing...

And longshot, you get 4 demerits for attempting to bring economics into a political discussion.

[Back]

10 demerits on top of that for horrible chart making.

[longshot]

Okay...


I will slink back to my GMAT prep in shame.
:sniffle:

[Edaarin]

Sucks for you, I don't need to take a GMAT. All I need to do is complete 150 credit hours to qualify to even sit for the CPA exam...I hate the state of Virginia.

[imported_Kranar]

<< Educate yourself and achieve something better. Raising the minimum will just keep people at the status quo and not try to achieve anything else. >>

The minimum wage is a matter of worker principle rather than a matter of trying to coerce people into finding a better job/education or else having to suffer. It's a way of preventing corporations from expoiting the poor or those desperate to find a job, and corporations do need people to work those jobs. Of course, many corporations still don't respect this and instead of exploiting the poor in the U.S. they decide to exploit the poor overseas.

Inflation increases by 3 percent a year, and the minimum wage has remained fixed for the past 8 years. There is always this hypothetical argument that raising the minimum wage can cause for inflation or cause for joblessness. Never in the history of minimum wage laws has this happened and anyone who can provide any evidence to the contrary is free to provide this information. Infact, President Clinton was the last one to sign the bill to increase minimum wage because just the opposite effect was seen to happen in states that increased their minimum wages and saw higher productivity and in turn even saw job growth.

[imported_Kranar]

<< Nor can you survive on 6 dollars an hour, and that would be a huge minimum wage increase. >>

For working parents working minimum wage jobs, an increase in minimum wage of $1.50 is more than $6000 a year.

[imported_Kranar]

I should also mention that the above figure assumes that the working parents work only 40 hours a week, and it turns out, many living in poverty are forced to work more.

[Jenisi]

:rah::rah::rah:

[Edaarin]

If you're making $5.75 an hour, get off your lazy ass and go to Wal-Mart. Their associates START at $9.50 in my area, and someone with the IQ of a sponge can do the job. True, you don't get many benefits, but it's freaking Wal-Mart...

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to not be able to earn a decent living if they are willing to work for it. Stop blaming the economy and get off your lazy asses.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Kranar
<< Nor can you survive on 6 dollars an hour, and that would be a huge minimum wage increase. >>

For working parents working minimum wage jobs, an increase in minimum wage of $1.50 is more than $6000 a year.

A minimum wage increase from 5.15 to 6 dollars an hour, taking into account taxes (I just did 30 percent, close enough) is about 1000 dollar difference.

$5.15 minimum wage - roughly $7100 a year after taxes.

$6 minimum wage - roughly $8300 a year after taxes.

You're telling me that is a viable way of supporting a family?

[imported_Kranar]

<< There is absolutely no reason for anyone to not be able to earn a decent living if they are willing to work for it. Stop blaming the economy and get off your lazy asses. >>

No matter what, there will always be a certain percentage of jobs that necessarily have to pay minimum wage. Regardless of education, how hard you work, regardless of anything, the job market necessarily has a certain percentage of jobs that pay minimum wage.

The issue isn't "Get off your ass and get a better job", even if the worker was able to find a better job, someone else will then need to fill the job they left. The issue is whether or not American citizens entitled to a minimum amount of payment for an hours worth of work. We already know that corporations will pay their employees as little as possible if they can get away with it, they'll pay their employees 5 cents an hour if they could, some do this already. Minimum wage laws are meant to uphold a standard of living, and if every single year inflation is increasing, the standard of living is increasing, but the poor are required to struggle more and more, then the minimum wage law is not fulfilling its intended purpose and needs to be changed.

[imported_Kranar]

<< A minimum wage increase from 5.15 to 6 dollars an hour, taking into account taxes (I just did 30 percent, close enough) is about 1000 dollar difference. >>

30 percent isn't close enough. Those in poverty don't pay taxes.

An increase in minimum wage of $1.50 gives a working family an increase of $6240, and that's IF they only work 40 hours a week, which is untrue of a large number of working families who have to work 55-60 hours a week.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Kranar]

[Shari]

I'm not going to get into any of the issues discussed because everyone else has put forward very good opinions.

I will say Bush has the CHEESIEST laugh on the planet, and wtf was up with that sarcastic stupid grin of his?


The boyfriend and I had fun using the freeze button on our remote to see how many times we could catch Kerry doing his "thumbs" gesture.

[Farquar]

I'm working on a paper so I apologize in advance if my arguments are all over the place.

As an individual trained in economics, I have never supported the idea of a minimum wage.

The min wage argument has always seemed like a red herring to me, simply because it seems that the market rate for minimum wage work is around $7.00 an hour, and that's what most companies pay. I base this assertion on purely anecdotal evidence, however; I live in a metropolitan area, where wages are typically higher than in rural Arkansas or wherever. I have never heard of a job paying less than $7.00, even for urinal cake droppers in a fast food joint.

What does this mean then? An increase in min wage to $7.00 will likely have little to no effect on the quality of life for these earners.

Some argue that increasing the min wage will encourage outsourcing. I find the argument weak, because most min wage jobs are menial service sector and farming jobs. You can't outsource these jobs.

What one poster said above is completely true: the minimum wage is a (dis)incentive point. The minimum wage is, contrary to what our consicence may desire, NOT for the sustainance of the low skill worker. Its an equlibrium point that encourages two distinct conditions: (1) adequate staffing for min wage jobs and (2) FREQUENT TURNOVER. The first is intuitive, but the second is not.

Generally speaking, we, as a society, do not want people be completely comfortable in minimum wage jobs. Having a large, stable minimum wage class leads to econmic and societal stagnation (similar to Communism). So, the government/market purposefully sets a wage that allows the worker to eek out a low level of subsistence, with the understanding that the worker is not expected to be in that position permanently. We want people to be improving their skills or at least wanting to do so, and the minimum wage is one mechanism that attempts to achive that purpose. Its much more efficient to push people into the fat part of the societal bell curve than try to raise the tail end of said curve.

So how do we help the poor people? It's all in the taxes baby. Increase the child tax credits, education credits, etc (Kerry's plan!). These are things poor people will actually feel, not the minimum wage level.

[Myshel]

My take on the debates.. more of the same with less histronics from Bush. Did anyone else notice they had the same tie on?

[imported_Kranar]

<< The min wage argument has always seemed like a red herring to me, simply because it seems that the market rate for minimum wage work is around $7.00 an hour, and that's what most companies pay >>

The market rate for minimum wage work is $5.15 an hour in the U.S. and plenty of jobs pay that. Heck in Canada our minimum wage is just slightly higher at $5.96 U.S. and plenty of jobs pay that here too. If you're conviction is true, or even the statement that the market rate for minimum wage work is $7.00 then there should be no problem whatsoever raising the minimum wage to just $6.00, but alas, it's not true and thus you're stuck with a minimum wage of $5.15.

<< I find the argument weak, because most min wage jobs are menial service sector and farming jobs. You can't outsource these jobs. >>

This is because other jobs that paid minimum wage have already been outsourced more than 15-20 years ago.

Outsourcing is nothing new, and has nothing to do with minimum wage, nor will it ever. The only reason it's beginning to show up more often in the news is because prior to 2 years ago, only the lower class had a problem with outsourcing and no one gave a damn... when someone with a low paying job has their job outsourced, the attitude is simply that they ought to just shutup, get off their lazy ass, and find a better job.

It's only in the past 2-3 years that we've seen corporations decide to outsource the upper-lower class, and the lower-middle class jobs, that's when people started to pay a bit more attention to it. And within the past year the trend of outsourcing middle-class jobs is what finally made people decide to cry foul over it. It was perfectly fine when corporations were screwing over the poor people, as is usually the case.

Very recently we've begun to see upper-middle class jobs getting outsourced. Computer programmers who in the U.S. would get paid 30-50 dollars an hour are having their jobs outsourced to China where programmers will work happily for 7-10 dollars (and this is considered A LOT). Chemical and computer engineers who would make 70-80 thousand a year can't compete with their counterpart engineers in India (who are DAMN well educated) who will work very happily for a fraction of that.

<< Generally speaking, we, as a society, do not want people be completely comfortable in minimum wage jobs. >>

Go make $6.50 an hour and report back to me just how comfortable your life is. This isn't about comfort, this is about ensuring some sort of standard of living. What kind of a first world nation intentionally sets a plan for screwing over the poor with the hope that the poor will climb up and aim for a better job? This sounds like a recipe for revolution rather than a recipe for economic health.

[Ilvane]

I don't give a damn about the corporate idiots making more money..what I do care about is that the people in poverty in this country has gone up under George Bush.

I'm not an economic expert either, but if you raised the minimum wage to a living wage, you could at least get some of those people spending money into the economy. You would also increase the taxes that people pay, because they would be making more money. You wouldn't put businesses under, as Bush would have you believe...it would create more business, so the business would do better. I don't really think that we would get a large amount of inflation. The amount of our deficit under Bush which keeps getting higher and higher is what really is going to cause inflation.

CT, I'd just am curious about why protecting the life of the mother was such a big deal for the people who wrote the partial birth abortion ban..Is the life of the mother worth more than the child? I really wonder if that is what they are trying to say.

I have more, but I have to go to work, (for my above minimum wage tax contributing single self..you know, the middle class, single unmarried woman who gets paid .76 on the dollar of men, and pays into her own healthcare, and pays more taxes because she isn't married or with children)

-A

[Tsa`ah]

Originally posted by Jenisi
And the problem you have with raising minimum wage is......???

CT pointed out inflation but that's a catch all answer.

Raising the minimum wage doesn't help the minimum wage earner at all. In fact it hurts them, small businesses, and the every aspect of the middle class as well.

The price on everything goes up. Anyone that pays a minimum wage jacks prices up in order to alleviate the burden. This burden is passed on to every consumer. The minimum wage earner will be jacked about getting 30 dollars more on their paycheck until it comes time to pay bills. Then they'll realize that they're about 20 dollars more short than they were before the raise.


Originally posted by Kitsun
Minimum wage should be people's incentive to get an education and move into a better job.

While this is a novel concept it has about as much support as the "No child left behind" act. If a person is unemployed, chances are they don't have the cash to further the education. There are grants, loans and scholarships, but said "unemployed" person is likely to have made too much in the previous tax season to be eligible for a quarter of what is available. Lob that in with the 6 month period that unemployment covers and you have every reason to try to find another low paying job than to get an associates in whatever.

The problem I have with both candidates on this issue is the sheer ignorance on the subject.

A minimum living wage would much more to resolve the "working poor" issue. The beauty of such a wage is that it's not standard. A full time burger flipper in Chicago would earn a wage that allows them to pay the utilities and rent, put food on the table, and cloth themselves. A burger flipper in Arcola IL would receive a much smaller check, but it would still be enough to do everything the flipper in Chicago does. Additionally (with lack of mass transit) the flipper in Arcola would be able to put gas in the tank and insure their vehicle.

A minimum living wage would ease to burden on the middle class and allow for economic growth. While one can argue that such a wage will do the same thing as a minimum wage, they can't argue that the relief on the middle class wouldn't compensate.

Neither candidate will back such a plan because it takes money out of the pockets of the corporations that back them. No CEO or board is willing to cut their own paychecks by any percentage, no upper, or middle management personnel would be very ecstatic about not receiving the annual raise either.

Greed is the main reason a system like this will never exist.

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Myshel
My take on the debates.. more of the same with less histronics from Bush. Did anyone else notice they had the same tie on?

My girl commented on that last night.

"It looks like Bush has a cheap version of Kerry's suit & tie"

[Farquar]

Originally posted by Kranar
This is because other jobs that paid minimum wage have already been outsourced more than 15-20 years ago.

This strengthens my argument. If all the jobs that can be outsourced already have been outsourced, then raising the minimum wage won't cause any more outsourcing, because there are no jobs left to outsource. That first part of my post was arguing IN FAVOR of the min wage increase.


Outsourcing is nothing new, and has nothing to do with minimum wage, nor will it ever.

Simply put, the higher the minimum wage, the greater the incentive for a corporation to move overseas. It seems that the wage has everything to do with outsourcing. People forget about cumulative effect of a minimum wage increase: if the guy who makes $5.15 now makes $7.00, then the guy who makes 7 now makes 9, and so on, providing an even greater incentive for a corporation to globalize.


Go make $6.50 an hour and report back to me just how comfortable your life is. This isn't about comfort, this is about ensuring some sort of standard of living. What kind of a first world nation intentionally sets a plan for screwing over the poor with the hope that the poor will climb up and aim for a better job? This sounds like a recipe for revolution rather than a recipe for economic health.

When I speak of "comfort", I'm speaking directly about quality of life. As I said before, our society DOESN'T WANT to provide the min wage class with a comfortable lifestyle, in order to encourage upward social mobility. I don't see it as "screwing over" of the poor, I see it as an exact opposite. Screwing them over would be keeping a low min wage AND denying upward social mobility. It's not exactly a "hope" either, there's plenty of empirical evidence that having an equilibriated min wage combined with ample educational opportunities creates a more skilled workforce.

Don't like it? Tough. We live in an somewhat paternalistic society that implicitly decided that it doesn't want to subsidize the lower class at the cost of economic development. That's what the welfare program is for.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Ilvane
CT, I'd just am curious about why protecting the life of the mother was such a big deal for the people who wrote the partial birth abortion ban..Is the life of the mother worth more than the child? I really wonder if that is what they are trying to say.-A

Partial Birth Abortion is never required to save the life of the mother.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Hulkein]

[xtc]

Originally posted by Kranar
<< Educate yourself and achieve something better. Raising the minimum will just keep people at the status quo and not try to achieve anything else. >>

The minimum wage is a matter of worker principle rather than a matter of trying to coerce people into finding a better job/education or else having to suffer. It's a way of preventing corporations from expoiting the poor or those desperate to find a job, and corporations do need people to work those jobs. Of course, many corporations still don't respect this and instead of exploiting the poor in the U.S. they decide to exploit the poor overseas.

Inflation increases by 3 percent a year, and the minimum wage has remained fixed for the past 8 years. There is always this hypothetical argument that raising the minimum wage can cause for inflation or cause for joblessness. Never in the history of minimum wage laws has this happened and anyone who can provide any evidence to the contrary is free to provide this information. Infact, President Clinton was the last one to sign the bill to increase minimum wage because just the opposite effect was seen to happen in states that increased their minimum wages and saw higher productivity and in turn even saw job growth.

Economics 101, increases in wages cost businesses increased cost. How do they compensate for increased cost? They raise prices, what is the effect of raised prices? Increase in inflation. It is called the wage/price spiral and had been proven by many studies. I am work so I will post links to the studies when I have more time.

Other possibilities lay off workers or stop hiring new workers. Move your company to somewhere with a lower minimum wage especially if that country has higher productivity.

Let's be honest the minimum wage primarily affects students with part-time jobs. It is a minimum bar; it is easy to get beyond this for those who want to.

[xtc]

After last nights debate I have to question my support of John Kerry I am worried that his platform doesn't match his voting record. Now this doesn't mean I am going to go running towards Bush, it does mean maybe a Republican House majority with Kerry as President is the best idea

[Back]

Originally posted by xtc
After last nights debate I have to question my support of John Kerry I am worried that his platform doesn't match his voting record. Now this doesn't mean I am going to go running towards Bush, it does mean maybe a Republican House majority with Kerry as President is the best idea

I’m definately leaning this way also. Guess I’m going stricly non-encumbent this year. MD has two dems.

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Ilvane
CT, I'd just am curious about why protecting the life of the mother was such a big deal for the people who wrote the partial birth abortion ban..Is the life of the mother worth more than the child? I really wonder if that is what they are trying to say.

Explain to me why a partial abortion is the ONLY solution to a mother in an emergency need in her third trimester. Maybe then I'll give it reconsideration. Until then, I still think it's a brutal practice and unnecessary at any stage of pregnancy.

[Wezas]

VA is still 6% in favor of the President. And hasn't given an electoral vote to a democrat in 40 years.

But I'm still voting.

[Chelle]

Originally posted by Edaarin
If you're making $5.75 an hour, get off your lazy ass and go to Wal-Mart. Their associates START at $9.50 in my area, and someone with the IQ of a sponge can do the job. True, you don't get many benefits, but it's freaking Wal-Mart...

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to not be able to earn a decent living if they are willing to work for it. Stop blaming the economy and get off your lazy asses.


I thought this needed repeating. Exactly right. Also if they raise minimum wages small businesses will go under. Raising minimum wages is NOT a good idea, right now. When people realize gawd I can't survive on minimum wages, maybe I should get off my lazy ass and do something about it.

[DeV]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by Ilvane
CT, I'd just am curious about why protecting the life of the mother was such a big deal for the people who wrote the partial birth abortion ban..Is the life of the mother worth more than the child? I really wonder if that is what they are trying to say.

Explain to me why a partial abortion is the ONLY solution to a mother in an emergency need in her third trimester. Maybe then I'll give it reconsideration. Until then, I still think it's a brutal practice and unnecessary at any stage of pregnancy. I have to agree with you on this one. Umm, I kind of doubt this is a practice performed in the US. If so, can someone provide some links as to where it's taking place. I know this is a practice regularly performed in places like China. You wouldn't think it necessary here with all the medical technology readily available.

[DeV]

Originally posted by Chelle

Originally posted by Edaarin
If you're making $5.75 an hour, get off your lazy ass and go to Wal-Mart. Their associates START at $9.50 in my area, and someone with the IQ of a sponge can do the job. True, you don't get many benefits, but it's freaking Wal-Mart...

There is absolutely no reason for anyone to not be able to earn a decent living if they are willing to work for it. Stop blaming the economy and get off your lazy asses.


I thought this needed repeating. Exactly right. Also if they raise minimum wages small businesses will go under. Raising minimum wages is NOT a good idea, right now. When people realize gawd I can't survive on minimum wages, maybe I should get off my lazy ass and do something about it. I don't agree with raising the minimum wage either. However, I wouldn't consider someone who is barely surviving from minimum wage as a lazy individual. They at least have a job, regardless of their struggles. You have to know deep down that with education your possibilities can become greater.

[Chelle]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by Ilvane
CT, I'd just am curious about why protecting the life of the mother was such a big deal for the people who wrote the partial birth abortion ban..Is the life of the mother worth more than the child? I really wonder if that is what they are trying to say.

Explain to me why a partial abortion is the ONLY solution to a mother in an emergency need in her third trimester. Maybe then I'll give it reconsideration. Until then, I still think it's a brutal practice and unnecessary at any stage of pregnancy.

I agree CT, but lets ask her to go one further and prove of an incident where it was absolutely necessary. The ONLY thing I can think of, is MAYBE the mother in her third trimester gets in a car accident. Both mother and baby are suffering, mother is losing blood profusely and for some reason they have to take the baby, and somehow they just know the baby won't survive outside the womb? It would have to be like some freak thing as to why they would have to kill the baby. Still I don't see it, but then I do realise freak accidents happen.

[Valthissa]

Originally posted by Backlash

Originally posted by xtc
After last nights debate I have to question my support of John Kerry I am worried that his platform doesn't match his voting record. Now this doesn't mean I am going to go running towards Bush, it does mean maybe a Republican House majority with Kerry as President is the best idea

I’m definately leaning this way also. Guess I’m going stricly non-encumbent this year. MD has two dems.

I think that the lesson of the last 30 years in both the state (Virginia) and federal government is that divided goverment is good government.

When one party controls all the branches of government they appear to feel no restraint to spend money on their favorite programs. I reached this conclusion in '96 and since then I have made some really odd votes.

I recently saw a poll that showed 16% of registered voters believe in divided government as a policy.

One thing I feel very strongly about after having suffered through all three debates:

A little bit of each candidate goes a very, very long way.

C/Valth

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Chelle
I agree CT, but lets ask her to go one further and prove of an incident where it was absolutely necessary. The ONLY thing I can think of, is MAYBE the mother in her third trimester gets in a car accident. Both mother and baby are suffering, mother is losing blood profusely and for some reason they have to take the baby, and somehow they just know the baby won't survive outside the womb? It would have to be like some freak thing as to why they would have to kill the baby. Still I don't see it, but then I do realise freak accidents happen.

I'd like to know why an emergency cesarean is not appropriate for that. Why kill the child? If he doesn't survive upon birth, at least the effort was made to save the child. But to kill it when there is no guarantee that it will save the mother seems a tad selfish to me.

[Satira]

I just want the Bible-licking cracker out of the White House. Oy.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Ilvane
You wouldn't put businesses under, as Bush would have you believe...it would create more business, so the business would do better.Why in the world would increasing costs result in more businesses? I can see how it would result in more turnover, but to flat out say there would be more seems rather impossible.

[Chelle]

You're preachin to the choir, CT. I agree with you. I am sayin the procedure is needless unless there is some freak reason, which there most likely won't be. How *was* that even legal in the first place is what I would like to know. And how did they even find one reason to justify it?

[CrystalTears]

Oh I know hon, I was just expanding on what you said. ;)

[Sean]

I'm undecided on how I feel about the raising of minimum wage but I find myself generally being against it, although I don't think $6-7 is going to hurt that much. That being said I have a question on the minimum wage issue. For people saying that those who don't want minimum wage should just go back to school so they can increase their earning power how exactly does this work? If more people who currently work for minimum wage jobs go back to school that increases the skilled work force but it doesn't increase the number of jobs in the skilled work force. How is this really an answer?

[xtc]

Originally posted by Tijay
I'm undecided on how I feel about the raising of minimum wage but I find myself generally being against it, although I don't think $6-7 is going to hurt that much. That being said I have a question on the minimum wage issue. For people saying that those who don't want minimum wage should just go back to school so they can increase their earning power how exactly does this work? If more people who currently work for minimum wage jobs go back to school that increases the skilled work force but it doesn't increase the number of jobs in the skilled work force. How is this really an answer?


"As recently as July 2004 there were over 3.19 million unfilled job opportunities in America, a number that only modestly changed in the preceding months. If filled, these new jobs could immediately reduce the number of unemployed people by about 39 percent."

"The U.S. Department of Labor recently estimated that more than half of the new generation of American workers leaves school without the basic skills necessary to qualify for a good job. Even those currently working are at risk of losing their jobs because they lack necessary skills. A recent report published by the American Assembly at Columbia University, for instance, found that more than one-third of the nation's current workforce is under-skilled. "

http://www.brookings.edu/printme.wbs?page=/metro/20040924_metroview.htm

[imported_Kranar]

<< How do they compensate for increased cost? They raise prices, what is the effect of raised prices? Increase in inflation. It is called the wage/price spiral and had been proven by many studies. I am work so I will post links to the studies when I have more time. >>

And I challenge you to prove this.

Every single time the minimum wage has increased, never in the history of your country, or mine, has this resulted in inflation. Never.

Infact, research at Harvard showed that increasing the minimum wage had just the opposite effect in New Jersey and other studies concluded the same thing about more local studies. This is what led to the last increase in minimum wage.

If you, or anyone on this forum or anywhere can provide a single instance where minimum wage has led to inflation... by all means... go ahead and show me.

It doesn't exist.

[imported_Kranar]

<< Simply put, the higher the minimum wage, the greater the incentive for a corporation to move overseas. It seems that the wage has everything to do with outsourcing. People forget about cumulative effect of a minimum wage increase: if the guy who makes $5.15 now makes $7.00, then the guy who makes 7 now makes 9, and so on, providing an even greater incentive for a corporation to globalize. >>

Corporations are outsourcing, have been outsourcing for 20 years, and are now outsourcing the jobs that pay 30-40 dollars.

It has nothing to do with minimum wage and blaming it on minimum wage is a poor excuse to allow for corporations to continue doing this.

The point I was making was about social stigmas toward poor people and how when anything goes wrong they're always the one to either take the blame or suffer the consequences.

No one cared about outsourcing when it was being done to the poor. When people were making 4.15 an hour had their job outsourced for literally 7 cents a day (Nike anyone?), who the hell cared? Are you saying that this is minimum wages fault? Do you really want to continue blaming the minimum wage and use that as a rug to shove all the problems of outsourcing underneath while working families struggle to make enough money to support themselves?

It's only when the middle class gets hurt that people cry foul, that's when people go "Oh shoot... it's now catching up to me."

Now everyone cares about outsourcing, now it's an issue in the news, now corporations who outsource are corrupt because they exploit workers in other countries at the expense of the middle class rather than just the poor class.

That's the point, and if you think that strengthens your argument, then I don't know what to tell you.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Kranar]

[imported_Kranar]

<< For example, taking a farmer in Taiwan who has nothing and giving him more chance for a future. >>

Yeah, you're right... especially those children Nike helps out. I mean, without that 7 cents a day, those children working for Nike would have no hope for a future.

[imported_Kranar]

Nothing like child labour to give hope to third world countries.

God bless Nike.

It's arguments like yours that slave owners used to justify slavery, just so you know.

"Without me, this black man would have nowhere to go. He works for me, and I give him a wooden shack, some food, and if he dares not appreciate what I give him I slap him with a bamboo whip. I give this slave a future."

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Kranar]

[imported_Kranar]

<< I'd love to hear you proposal!! How about a global minimum wage? >>

My point isn't about whether or not child labour gives hope to children of foreign nations. I'm not talking about outsourcing to make a point, good, or bad, about child labour. The point I'm making is that outsourcing doesn't have, and never had, anything to do with any minimum wage law period.

Unless someone here is bold enough to state that companies should have the right to pay Americans 7 cents a day for work, then minimum wage laws have nothing to do with outsourcing. And to further my claim, jobs that pay the middle class are being outsourced just as well as jobs that pay minimum wage.

Does this mean the middle class should just shutup, quit whining, and find themselves a better job? Because if what some people are saying is true... then the middle class has done a lot more whining over the past 2 years then the poor class ever did over the past 15.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Kranar
<< How do they compensate for increased cost? They raise prices, what is the effect of raised prices? Increase in inflation. It is called the wage/price spiral and had been proven by many studies. I am work so I will post links to the studies when I have more time. >>

And I challenge you to prove this.

Every single time the minimum wage has increased, never in the history of your country, or mine, has this resulted in inflation. Never.

Infact, research at Harvard showed that increasing the minimum wage had just the opposite effect in New Jersey and other studies concluded the same thing about more local studies. This is what led to the last increase in minimum wage.

If you, or anyone on this forum or anywhere can provide a single instance where minimum wage has led to inflation... by all means... go ahead and show me.

It doesn't exist.

I have this stuff in my old eco text books, but here is a 10 second search from google.

http://www.bidpa.bw/Increasing%20the%20Minimum%20Wage%20Costs%20Jobs%2 0and%20Increases%20Poverty.htm

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa106.html

http://www.ncpa.org/hotlines/min/pd082100a.html

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by xtc]

[Ravenstorm]

Originally posted by Kranar
Does this mean the middle class should just shutup, quit whining, and find themselves a better job?

That's actually exactly what Bush said. Go back to school and learn how to do something else instead of what you've been doing for the last twenty years.

Raven

[Ilvane]

Yeah Raven, and the oddest thing to me is that some people are nodding in agreement and saying.."Yeah, that's what they should do, quit bitching and get an education!"

Too bad he won't raise the minimum wage so more parents can afford to send their kids to college..

-A

[imported_Kranar]

<< I have this stuff in my old eco text books, but here is a 10 second search from google. >>

This is why I really don't like arguing with people who can do no better than Google their information instead of present their own arguments and ideas. But alas... you presented these links...

Read the very first link you gave me. Please, just read the very first link that you gave me to illustrate that raising the minimum wage increases inflation. When you do so, you'll see that it specifically states that raising the minimum wage DOES NOT increase inflation.

The author disagrees with increasing the minimum wage, but he is very quick to point out that inflation is not the result of minimum wage. He specifically states what many people studying the economy already know. That inflation is an increase in the supply of money, not in it's distribution.

Read the second link you give me... I've read it entirely, and after reading I thought "Hmm... no where does this link ever mention inflation. I must be wrong, why would someone link so confidently link to an article to support the notion that minimum wage increases inflation if that article doesn't even discuss inflation period."

So I knew there's no way I could be right and I decided to CTR-F, search for the words: inflation, inflate, infl, and guess what... no match.

Please... in the future... if you're going to Google, atleast read what it is you're Googling instead of asking me to read stuff you obviously couldn't be bothered to read yourself.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Kranar]

[GSTamral]

Raising the minimum wage is not necessarily a bad idea. Nationally, the effect on inflation historically has been minimal, and if anything, it serves to raise the standard of living in areas where the cost of living is low.

Most larger companies already pay more than minimum wage. The net effect on small businesses may be harsh in the short term, but in terms of the overall health of the economy, it is not a bad thing to do.

What is truly funny about minimum wage, is it is basically the government becoming the union leader for the group that most needs it, acting in a way that actually is responsible in helping keep poorer people capable of putting food on the table.

[Hulkein]

Originally posted by Ravenstorm

Originally posted by Kranar
Does this mean the middle class should just shutup, quit whining, and find themselves a better job?

That's actually exactly what Bush said. Go back to school and learn how to do something else instead of what you've been doing for the last twenty years.

Raven

I wasn't aware middle class was minimum wage.

Your point is invalid.

[CrystalTears]

Actually the middle class issue was brought up because outsourcing is affecting middle class workers as well as the minimum wage workers. They've kinda muddled the two issues. ;)

[Jenisi]

I think you missed the point.

[CrystalTears]

The point is that neither candidate has a good agenda to fix the outsourcing problem.

[Sean]

Originally posted by xtc
"As recently as July 2004 there were over 3.19 million unfilled job opportunities in America, a number that only modestly changed in the preceding months. If filled, these new jobs could immediately reduce the number of unemployed people by about 39 percent."

"The U.S. Department of Labor recently estimated that more than half of the new generation of American workers leaves school without the basic skills necessary to qualify for a good job. Even those currently working are at risk of losing their jobs because they lack necessary skills. A recent report published by the American Assembly at Columbia University, for instance, found that more than one-third of the nation's current workforce is under-skilled. "

http://www.brookings.edu/printme.wbs?page=/metro/20040924_metroview.htm

Wait .. your 1st quote doesn't distinguish between skilled and unskilled labor jobs or just jobs above min wage fror that matter. And your 2nd post basically says it's not worth going back to school because most students are coming out underskilled. Maybe I'm taking the quotes the wrong way but thats what I'm getting.

[Farquar]

Originally posted by Kranar
Corporations are outsourcing, have been outsourcing for 20 years, and are now outsourcing the jobs that pay 30-40 dollars.

It has nothing to do with minimum wage and blaming it on minimum wage is a poor excuse to allow for corporations to continue doing this.

I can't make you understand, and I'm starting to get real frustrated. In terms of incentives, then yes the minimum wage has EVERYTHING to do with outsourcing. You've misunderstood me as saying that minimum wages are the cause of outsourcing, but that's not what I said. You think I say min wages are an excuse for outsourcing, and thats not what I said. What I said was changes in minimum wage levels will affect (future) incentives for corporations to outsource. If you can't understand this basic tenet, then I won't bother posting on this subject any more.

In case you didn't pick it up in my first post, I was aruging on both sides of the coin, the first paragraph in favor of a min wage increase and the rest opposing it.

Youre thinking with your heart and not with your head. Whenever an economy undergoes a structural change, the poorest people take the brunt. This country was built on the backs of slaves, coal miners, and factory workers, generally low and middle class people. I'm not saying its right, but that's just how things are.

[GSTamral]

You heard it here first. No job paying minimum wage will ever be outsourced at today's current minimum wage.

Those manufacturing jobs being outsourced are being outsourced because labor UNIONS in this country have raised the standard wage for unskilled labor too much. At the price they are demanding, anything that can be outsourced, will be outsourced.

I have nothing against a raise in the federal minimum wage. Honestly, I approve of such a measure, to increase it by an amount equal to the rate of inflation each year.

Outsourcing, however, is completely a different matter.

[GSTamral]

What would happen to Bush or Kerry if they took Viagra?

They'd get taller

[Hulkein]

Haha.

[imported_Kranar]

<< What I said was changes in minimum wage levels will affect (future) incentives for corporations to outsource. >>

All incentives form a cause, although not all causes form an incentive. So when you say that minimum wage offers an incentive for corporations to outsource, it then also forms a cause.

The argument, of course, is false right at the premise, the premise being that minimum wage laws have an effect on outsourcing.

When middle class jobs are being outsourced, when jobs that typically pay 60-70k are now being outsourced, the notion that minimum wage laws have any bearing on outsourcing becomes trivial. Unless you propose making the minimum wage in America 7 cents a day or something rediculously low, then outsourcing will ALWAYS be a benefit, a cause, an incentive, whatever term you wish to use for corporations, minimum wage or not.

Trying to pinpoint minimum wage as being any significant factor in driving corporations to outsource is trivial. It is too insignificant to hold onto as an argument against allowing people to make enough money to meet a basic standard of living that every year increases.

[Edited on 10-15-2004 by Kranar]

[Valthissa]

Originally posted by Kranar

It is too insignificant to hold onto as an argument against allowing people to make enough money to meet a basic standard of living that every year increases.

[Edited on 10-15-2004 by Kranar]

There is a lot of research that says the effect of the mimimum wage on adult poverty is statistically insignificant. Isn't the (legislative) purpose to prevent the exploitation of people entering the workforce?

As I recall there was a great deal of controversy in economics because the results of researching the minimum wage effects were at odds with neoclassical price theory. This led to a lot of debate among economists when Clinton proposed an increase.

(Everyone knows that you only have to pay the minimum wage (in the U.S.) if you're covered by the FSLA, right?)

outsourcing - now there's a subject worthy of it's own thread.

C/Valth

[Back]

Originally posted by CrystalTears
The point is that neither candidate has a good agenda to fix the outsourcing problem.

Wrong. Kerry does. Bush dosen’t. We had an entire discussion about this just last week.

Even if people think Kerry’s is far fetched or unrealistic or whatever, he still has a plan and wants to do something about it. Its your candidate who has no plan.

Go to GeorgeWBush.com (http://www.georgewbush.com), hit the economy section, then type “outsourcing” into the search field. You’ll get 10 articles. 9 are about Kerry, one is about how outsourcing is not a problem.

Do the same on the JohnKerry.com (http://www.johnkerry.com) and you’ll get 179 hits, some about Bush, but most about what Kerry wants to do about it.

[Hulkein]

I understand you are a staunch fan of Kerry, Backlash. You both were even together in opposing Desert Storm when Kuwait was invaded... But please get out of here with JohnKerry.com, for the love of Pablo.

[Back]

Originally posted by Hulkein
I understand you are a staunch fan of Kerry, Backlash. You both were even together in opposing Desert Storm when Kuwait was invaded... But please get out of here with JohnKerry.com, for the love of Pablo.

Its not so much being a staunch fan of Kerry. Its being a staunch fan of progress, doing things smart, and not being a crybaby idiot.

I could have left Kerry’s site out of that post and it would have made the same point I was making for CT. Bush has no plan for outsourcing and dosen’t see it as a problem. Last time I checked, this country needed jobs. Why the fuck are they being outsourced.

Don’t bother. I already know the answer. Its not to help you or me, its to help the selfish fat cats who can’t squeeze a nickle out of their asses even though it would really help the rest of us.

[Farquar]

Originally posted by Kranar
The argument, of course, is false right at the premise, the premise being that minimum wage laws have an effect on outsourcing.

You're wrong. Just dead wrong. Play with semantics and sentence structure all you want. All I said is that there would be an effect. It could be .01%. It could be 1%. But there IS AN EFFECT. You're telling me that raising the wages of all min wage employees in america 20% won't cause changes in the way firms do business? If even one firm outsources one more job that they wouldnt have had the minimum wage not increased, that is called an effect.

[Ilvane]

Here's a nice fact for you:

The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center recently calculated that most of Bush's tax cuts -- 53% to be exact -- went to the highest -earning 10% of US individuals and families.Those most affluent Americans got an average tax cut of $7,661.

And as for the "low- and middle-income Americans" Bush mentioned in the debate -- the bottom 60% of individuals and families got only 13.7% of the tax cuts, according to the Tax Policy Center, a far cry from "most" of the cuts as claimed by Bush.

The President came closer to the mark, but still got it wrong, when he said in the same breath that the top 20% of earners pay "about 80% of the taxes in America today." That's incorrect.

In fact, the Congressional Budget Office calculates that the top 20% now pay 63.5% of the total federal tax burden, which includes income taxes, payroll taxes and other federal levies. It's true that the top 20% pays nearly 81% of all federal income taxes, but the president spoke more expansively of "taxes in America," not just income taxes.

Just thought I might throw that out there.

So who exactly is Bush working for?

-A

[imported_Kranar]

<< As I recall there was a great deal of controversy in economics because the results of researching the minimum wage effects were at odds with neoclassical price theory. This led to a lot of debate among economists when Clinton proposed an increase. >>

You betcha.

But I'm a believer that when research does not uphold a theory, it's time to change the theory, not the research.

[Back]

:stupid:

[CrystalTears]

Originally posted by Backlash
Wrong. Kerry does.

He does? You mean by giving those outsourcing companies a tax break to keep them here? Those companies will laugh at that tax break since they're saving a shit load more money than a tax break could ever make up for.

Thus why I said neither one of them are going to help the outsourcing problem. What they should do it put taxes on the outsourced JOBS.

[Amaron]

OK I am so undecided...

But on a lighter note:

Kerry has a wierd mouth and his hair looks like it is plastic....

:weird:

J

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Amaron
OK I am so undecided...

But on a lighter note:

Kerry has a wierd mouth and his hair looks like it is plastic....

:weird:

J

I'll take a wierd mouth instead of crusty spit anyday.

[Back]

Originally posted by CrystalTears

Originally posted by Backlash
Wrong. Kerry does.

He does? You mean by giving those outsourcing companies a tax break to keep them here? Those companies will laugh at that tax break since they're saving a shit load more money than a tax break could ever make up for.

Thus why I said neither one of them are going to help the outsourcing problem. What they should do it put taxes on the outsourced JOBS.

At least we three can agree its a problem and want to do something about it.

[Betheny]

Originally posted by Wezas

Originally posted by Amaron
OK I am so undecided...

But on a lighter note:

Kerry has a wierd mouth and his hair looks like it is plastic....

:weird:

J

I'll take a wierd mouth instead of crusty spit anyday.

The last thing I wanted to think about today was crusty Bush spit. Thanks a whole hell of a lot. Jackass.

[xtc]

Originally posted by Kranar
<< I have this stuff in my old eco text books, but here is a 10 second search from google. >>

This is why I really don't like arguing with people who can do no better than Google their information instead of present their own arguments and ideas. But alas... you presented these links...

Read the very first link you gave me. Please, just read the very first link that you gave me to illustrate that raising the minimum wage increases inflation. When you do so, you'll see that it specifically states that raising the minimum wage DOES NOT increase inflation.

The author disagrees with increasing the minimum wage, but he is very quick to point out that inflation is not the result of minimum wage. He specifically states what many people studying the economy already know. That inflation is an increase in the supply of money, not in it's distribution.

Read the second link you give me... I've read it entirely, and after reading I thought "Hmm... no where does this link ever mention inflation. I must be wrong, why would someone link so confidently link to an article to support the notion that minimum wage increases inflation if that article doesn't even discuss inflation period."

So I knew there's no way I could be right and I decided to CTR-F, search for the words: inflation, inflate, infl, and guess what... no match.

Please... in the future... if you're going to Google, atleast read what it is you're Googling instead of asking me to read stuff you obviously couldn't be bothered to read yourself.

[Edited on 10-14-2004 by Kranar]

My apologies on the first two links. I did present my argument in my first post. Rising labour costs increase product prices thus increasing inflation. You are talking about inflation caused by an increase in the money supply which is called Demand Pull inflation. There is also cost push inflation which is caused by increase in the cost of goods. Raising the minimum wage causes a increase in the cost of goods and services. Thus raising the minimum wage causes a rise in inflation &/or a reduction in jobs or a slowing of intended hiring.

I can only assume you have a picture of Milton Friedman on your wall. I guess you don't believe that rising oil prices contribute to inflation either.

From the the third link:

"Higher wage costs force employers to raise prices, thereby contributing to inflation"

http://www.ncpa.org/hotlines/min/pd082100a.html

[xtc]

Originally posted by Tijay

Originally posted by xtc
"As recently as July 2004 there were over 3.19 million unfilled job opportunities in America, a number that only modestly changed in the preceding months. If filled, these new jobs could immediately reduce the number of unemployed people by about 39 percent."

"The U.S. Department of Labor recently estimated that more than half of the new generation of American workers leaves school without the basic skills necessary to qualify for a good job. Even those currently working are at risk of losing their jobs because they lack necessary skills. A recent report published by the American Assembly at Columbia University, for instance, found that more than one-third of the nation's current workforce is under-skilled. "

http://www.brookings.edu/printme.wbs?page=/metro/20040924_metroview.htm

Wait .. your 1st quote doesn't distinguish between skilled and unskilled labor jobs or just jobs above min wage fror that matter. And your 2nd post basically says it's not worth going back to school because most students are coming out underskilled. Maybe I'm taking the quotes the wrong way but thats what I'm getting.

lol..You should work in political spin. The article's thrust is that it is lack of skills/training that is a problem.

"In Cleveland, the Greater Cleveland Growth Association, one of the nation's largest metropolitan chambers of commerce, identified the workforce needs of companies and then worked with various groups to design and deliver appropriate training. These intermediary efforts included partnerships with Cuyahoga Community College and other organizations that, over three-year year period, equipped over 2000 individuals with skills needed by employers and landed them well-paying jobs. "

"In Wisconsin, for example, 125 firms and 100,000 workers have formed a workforce intermediary partnership to cooperatively address current skill shortages and to plan for future labor market modernization. As a result of this partnership, employers in manufacturing, building and construction, healthcare and other industries are investing over $25 million per year to upgrade the skill sets of 6,000 current employees. The partnership has also extended job training for prospective employees that has enabled 2,000 jobseekers to find entry-level jobs that pay nearly two times the minimum wage. "

[imported_Kranar]

How convenient, and depressing, that I find this article on Yahoo's main page.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=711&e=10&u=/usatoday/20041014/tc_usatoday/endangeredspeciesusprogrammers

Wezas... we may be screwed.

[xtc]

"Inflation can result from a decrease in aggregate supply. The two main sources of decrease in aggregate supply are

AN INCREASE IN WAGE RATES

An increase in the prices of raw materials
These sources of a decrease in aggregate supply operate by increasing costs, and the resulting inflation is called cost-push inflation"

http://economics.about.com/cs/money/a/inflation_terms.htm

[Wezas]

Originally posted by Kranar
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=711&e=10&u=/usatoday/20041014/tc_usatoday/endangeredspeciesusprogrammers

Wezas... we may be screwed.

Fuck.

Time to start coding some of the programs I distribute to stop working after a certain date. And then try to remember to change the date if I'm still around.

I also don't document anything.

Job security.

[imported_Kranar]

<< I also don't document anything >>

ROFL.

Good man, good man.

[xtc]

Definition of Inflation

"The overall general upward price movement of goods and services in an economy, usually as measured by the Consumer Price Index and the Producer Price Index. Over time, as the cost of goods and services increase, the value of a dollar is going to fall because a person won't be able to purchase as much with that dollar as he/she previously could."

http://www.investorwords.com/2452/inflation.html

Increasing minimum wage causes increased costs of goods and services which causes inflation.

[Latrinsorm]

Originally posted by Ilvane
Those most affluent Americans got an average tax cut of $7,661.I wonder what the % tax cut was for the rich and the poor. I can tell you that 8000 is barely a percentage point for really affluent folks.

Math time!
10% of Americans = 25,000,000
Avg cut of 7661 = $192,000,000,000
53% of cuts means that total tax cut = $361,000,000,000
Lowest 60% get 13.7% = $49,500,000,000
60% of Americans = 150,000,000
So they each get = $330
Which, for the poverty level folks (according to your TPC), is a bit less than half the taxes they pay. Not too bad.