patrick.net

sbh says

control point says

indigenous says

Because what you are saying is a trope.

Using obscure words incorrectly makes you look like a fucking retard.

aaaannnddd CUT!

I think we all have plentiful a posteriori knowledge that indigenous is a psuedo intellectual..

I could have just said evidence, but doesn't a posteriori make me sound intelligent, and automatically make my argument more powerful ? That's what my "Arguing for Dummies" book suggested anyway.

Strategist says

If it costs more to make something, but you cannot pass it on to the consumer then production i.e. supply will fall, leading to higher prices. Corporations exist to make a profit. Let them.

Again--not necessarily. If a company is making 35% profit on an item, they won't cut production just because they are now only making 33% profit on it.

And like others pointed out already--if a higher minimum wage increases demand, which it will for many things, who's to say where the new equilibrium between supply and demand will be.

dodgerfanjohn says

You are arguing with someone whose position basically boils down to "everyone should have equal stuff".

Nice strawman.

dodgerfanjohn says

Tats either an emotional simp or a corrupt politician(or lackey thereof).

Or someone who understands macroeconomics much, much more clearly than you.

sbh says

Oh, yes. Anyone who comes to an anonymous forum grovelling for validation...."it was a 700 page book!".....has more personal need than intellectual undertaking.

I don't grovel with tranny illiterate tree fuckers.

FortWayne says

Now I know that with this legislation Marcus is probably going to be getting a raise, since he is in a union. So I expect him to fully support this.

I do support the idea of increasing the LA's minimum wage. And the mayors plan is very conservative. $10.25 in 2015, and up to 13.25 in what, 2017 ?

Wow, that's not exactly radical given the current cost of living in Los Angeles.

Two people making $13.25/hr working 40 hours per week would make $1060 per month. In most of LA that wouldn't pay for much of a one bedroom apartment, let alone the actual minimal cost of living for two people, even with food stamps.

But I get it, minimum wage isn't supposed to be a living wage. IT's supposed to be a wage for kids living at home, or maybe immigrants sharing a garage they are renting to camp in, with five other people.

In any case, yeah, I support the idea, in fact it should be more than what Garcetti is proposing, and it has nothing to do with teachers pay, although it is true that after nearly 8 years without a raise, and pay cuts during several of those years, we LA teachers are due for a raise too.

SOme people are so stupid. We have inflation that increases faster than wages in recent years, and the dimbulbs such as FW, half of whom are probably on welfare, say increasing the minimum wage is bad. How do you think that incomes are supposed to keep up, if the bottom incomes don't rise ? All the arguments about businesses not being able to afford the increases I believe are mostly BS. WE know that's not the case with corporations.

WE've tried trickle down theory which was a massive failure. Maybe there's something to be said for being concerned with low income and lower middle income people.

better to have a sliding minimum wage validated by minimum work
your new rate is $8 to $12/hr, to get 8 you must accomplish XXX, to get 12, accomplish XXX..it's up to the worker.
too many lazy fucks just showing up and doing nothing...

FortWayne says

Minimum wage increase in Los Angeles (Yay or Nay?

indigenous says

Not understanding a common word used correctly is making You look like a retard.

LITERALLY you didn't understand my last point. FIGURATIVELY it flew right over your head.

Allow me to FIGURATIVELY type more slowly this time to LITERALLY explain to you the difference between figurative and literal language use.

When I say you "look like a retard," I don't mean you LITERALLY look like a retard. First of all, what does a retard look like? Considering I'm not able to see you at all, I have no idea what you looked like as you typed the word "Trope." The only way you could LITERALLY look like a retard would be if you were, in fact, a retard or if you we able to contort your face into certain facial downs syndrome characteristics. You could "sound" like a retard, but that would require me to be able to physically hear you.

Anyway, if I was using LITERAL language, I would have needed to say "Using obscure words incorrectly shows me you do not fully understand the meaning of the word." However, I chose to use FIGURATIVE language to again see if you understood how the word "trope" is used in context. You did not, LITERALLY.

Now, my example regarding a large majority of customers of fast food restaurants being minimum wage workers is not a figure of speech. It is a LITERAL statement of fact - supported by actual physical research - which was provided.

Assuming you were using trope in the alternative definition of a cliche - the theme that minimum wage workers are frequently fast food establishments is hardly overused. And even if it was, that is hardly a counterargument - especially if my point was correct. As I pointed out - the relationship between Ford paying above market wages and raising the wage for ALL minimum wage workers is nonexistent.

indigenous says

What you fail to understand is that the very simple and accurate definition for inflation is an increase in money supply

I'm talking about prices - you are talking about money supply. You have LITERALLY been shown with data numerous times that there is no correlation between prices and money supply. However you wish to define inflation - I DID NOT USE THE WORD.

indigenous says

I really do know which way is up on this subject.

Your self awareness is blinded by your ego. Your ego will not allow you to refrain from response. We have argued many times - and you have never proven me wrong while I have shown data and used logic to the point to where it is quite obvious who is correct.

So with that I'll give you the last word on the topic. I don't need it this debate is done.

Prove me wrong.

Has the mayor completed any studies on the impact to the workforce and local business for this raise, or does he just need to pass it so we can see what's in it?

FortWayne says

Our current Mayor wants to increase it to $14 or so an hour, from the current $10.

projecting again, are we??

sbh says

Oh, yes. Anyone who comes to an anonymous forum grovelling for validation...

that was dodgerfan...man u need new glasses...

tatupu70 says

dodgerfanjohn says

You are arguing with someone whose position basically boils down to "everyone should have equal stuff".

Nice strawman.

Control Point

I used the word trope in reference to: Henry Ford increased his workers wages to increase the sales of his cars. The idea of increasing minimum wage so as to increase the sales of fast food is also a trope.

Actually I think food is given free to the workers as a perk of the job.

Minimum wage workers do not waste money on fast food.

The reality is that if there is an increase in the money supply compared to price discovery, it will result in an increase in prices, like any other inflation. This is part of the higher cost of RE in the bay area. This is why the hardware business was great around Sutters Mill.

control point says

I'm talking about prices - you are talking about money supply. You have LITERALLY been shown with data numerous times that there is no correlation between prices and money supply.

This is the core argument. Keynesians believe that inflation is nothing more than prices going up.

This is where you go off the rails on this subject.

It is hard to have a controlled experiment in economics because there are always many contributing factors. But inflation at the very least is correlated to an increase in money supply, compared to the value of the service or product.

Here is Mises definition:

Inflation. In popular nonscientific usage, a large increase in the quantity of money in the broader sense (q.v.) which results in a drop in the purchasing power of the monetary unit, falsifies economic calculation and impairs the value of accounting as a means of appraising profits and losses. Inflation affects the various prices, wage rates and interest rates at different times and to different degrees. It thus disarranges consumption, investment, the course of production and the structure of business and industry while increasing the wealth and income of some and decreasing that of others. Inflation does not increase the available consumable wealth. It merely rearranges purchasing power by granting some to those who first receive some of the new quantities of money.
This popular definition, a large increase in the quantity of money, is satisfactory for history and politics but it lacks the precision of a scientific term since the distinction between a small increase and a large increase in quantity of money is indefinite and the differences in their effects are merely a matter of degree.
A more precise concept for use in theoretical analysis is any increase in the quantity of money in the broader sense which is not offset by a corresponding increase in the need for money in the broader sense, so that a fall in the objective exchange-value (purchasing power) of money must ensue.
NOTE: The currently popular fashion of defining inflation by one of its effects, higher prices, tends to conceal from the public the other effects of an increase in the quantity of money whenever the resulting rise in prices is offset by a corresponding drop in prices due to an increase in production. The use of this definition thus weakens the opposition to further increases in the quantity of money by political flat or manipulation and permits a still greater distortion of the economic structure before the inevitable readjustment period, popularly known as a recession or depression (q.v.).

But you will not agree with this point, therefore I agree to disagree.

The thing that angers me is that inflation is considered to be a factor in the economy that is beyond anyone's control. When in fact assholes like Greenspan or Bernanke very much control the money supply. The effects of which are depriving the people of the real exchange they have earned.

Of course this trope has been furthered by politicians because it helps them to get reelected.

CL says

Yawn/yap/yawn.

I know what the minimum wage should be!

Ah, there is the forum level of debate in a nutshell. "I don't know the inputs that need to be weighed to make an intelligent decision, but I know what the output should be! Everyone who doesn't agree is just yapping! I'll ask them questions, but I don't want any answers! Don't bother me with facts! "I don't want to hear the end of any sentences!"" Yawn. Time for more tea.

indigenous says

The reality is that if there is an increase in the money supply compared to price discovery, it will result in an increase in prices, like any other inflation. This is part of the higher cost of RE in the bay area. This is why the hardware business was great around Sutters Mill.

A lot of people don't understand it. They think there is a benefit, they just don't see how short lived that benefit is. For a few month, maybe even a whole year it's a benefit... until prices catch up and everyone is just more f*cked at the end of it.

curious2 says

CL says

Yawn/yap/yawn.

I know what the minimum wage should be!

Ah, there is the forum level of debate in a nutshell. "I don't know the inputs that need to be weighed to make an intelligent decision, but I know what the output should be! Everyone who doesn't agree is just yapping! I'll ask them questions, but I don't want any answers! Don't bother me with facts! "I don't want to hear the end of any sentences!"" Yawn. Time for more tea.

Yes! Is there nothing that cannot be solved with a dash of snark and pithy pissyness?

indigenous says

Henry Ford increased his workers wages to increase the sales of his cars.

He increased wages because the job had long hours and was boring as fuck, and he had retention problems.

prodigy says

better to have a sliding minimum wage validated by minimum work your new rate is $8 to $12/hr, to get 8 you must accomplish XXX, to get 12, accomplish XXX..it's up to the worker.

Sounds like a way to give the employer freedom to pay whatever he wants, within a range that is.

The word *minimum* has a meaning. Under the plan you describe the minimum is 8.

It goes without saying that the employer is free to pay more than the minimum if an employee warrants higher pay, for whatever reason.

thunderlips11 says

He increased wages because the job had long hours and was boring as fuck, and he had retention problems.

Agreed, the statement you quoted was the trope, the meme, the legend, which was not true.

I find it ironic that the same people who push for higher minimum wage, are also the exact same people who get all warm and fuzzy with the concept that fast food workers could be replaced by printing food and an iPhone app.