Page 43 of 57 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 567

Thread: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recession

  1. #421
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    62,344

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    Why? You've done me the same. Is that a power only you have?
    You?

    He's done that for everyone left of Pat Buchanan. In fact, it's pretty much his entire shtick
    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    I don't have any issue with any investigation.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #422
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    No one here is talking about living wage.



    Straw man.
    You mean nobody is admitting to talking about it.

    Really poor deflection.

    Perhaps you'd like to prove a similar desire to ignore the relevant points in my post?

  3. #423
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,519

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You don't seem to understand what you wrote. You said


    Jobs which can't be filled for lack of qualified workers are obviously not monopsonic so your claim is moronic BS.
    The point I was making was that the standard was incorrect, and that to claim a monopsony under it was foolishness.

    It's not exactly like this was some grand hidden, nuanced, point that I really depended upon the reader to be able to infer from deep understanding.

    Here's what I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill
    Quote Originally Posted by imagep
    it doesn't absolutely have to be just one buyer, just that the number of sellers have to significantly outnumber the amount of buyers.
    By that standard,[[cpwill interjects to point out - "that standard" is pretty clearly responding to "the number of sellers have to significantly outnumber the amount of buyers to be a monopsony"]] every form of employment is monopsony - it is a standard so broad as to be useless [[see, this is the portion that you for some convenient reason cut off]].

    Did you... did you even read what you were responding to? Or was your decision to mischaracterize it deliberate?

  4. #424
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    06-21-18 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,917

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    If a labor supply curve is upsloping, that means that you will need to offer higher wages in order to attract additional workers, if you want to attract additional workers. Demand for labor is elastic (which you have argued as I recall is actually a good thing in this regards, as it increases the relative incentive for investment in capital). I'd look with a jaundiced eye at the claim that that is our unique driver in this market, as opposed to considering opportunity costs such as leisure, or competition from off the books labor. There is absolutely slack in the Low Skill Labor force.
    LOL! Just as i thought. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. This has become a common theme in discussions regarding political economy. The cult-like attitude simply won't cut it!

    If people have knowledge about open positions and pay, the hiring firms labor supply curve should be completely elastic, or have a slope of zero. In a competitive labor market, a single firm is a wage taker (not a wage maker!). This differs from the labor supply curve of the labor market itself, which should be upward sloping as workers would be more willing to work in positions that have higher pay.

    The competitive labor market and the single firm should have a wage diagram as follows:



    In the instance of monopsony, a single firms wage diagram becomes:


    Do i need to explain why the wage in a competitive market will be higher than the wage in a labor market dominated by dynamic monopsony? Do i also have to explain why a minimum wage will essentially eliminate a monopsonistic wage?


    That is interesting to see you say, given that this discussion started with you doing precisely that - the post you responded to was my response to Dittohead Not.
    That is a flat out lie. This discussion started when i replied to WSV's post stating that the low skilled labor market can be summed up by monopsony. This fictional response to Dittohead is of no consequence to our discussion.

    I have no problem learning - quite the opposite. It is in fact, a large part of why I come here.
    After all of our exchanges these past few years, your posts reflect an entirely different reality. Clearly you are an intelligent guy, so why do you allow your ideology to substitute for your capacity to learn?

    You merely confuse your comfort with the terminology with the status of automatically being the smartest person in any room you walk into (a common affliction), which is unfortunately why you overbite. It's not exactly like any of this stuff is rocket surgery.
    My apologies for understanding the topic. Perhaps you can do better than claiming to understand a topic you clearly do not?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #425
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    06-21-18 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,917

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by WallStreetVixen View Post
    Business is not a one way street, so all it describes is that the low skill market have very poor leveraging skills.
    That is correct.

    A monopsony, for the most part, is fictional.
    Again, this is correct. While a single buyer of labor is largely non-existent, the implications (upward sloping labor supply curve of the single firm shifting to its marginal revenue cost) often do exist.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #426
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    06-21-18 @ 01:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,917

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by WallStreetVixen View Post
    Its bad for people who cannot achieve their first job, obtain the necessary skills for their career paths and people entering the labour force who simply just want to make a living.
    I was unaware you were concerned with people who choose not to prepare themselves the the modern economy. It is highly unlikely people enter the labor force to earn the lowest amount possible.

    These are why we have internships, as the only legal way for having a fully capable person to work below the minimum wage is if they work for free.
    The "you are getting paid with training" model is ripe with exploitation.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #427
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    62,344

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    The point I was making was that the standard was incorrect, and that to claim a monopsony under it was foolishness.

    It's not exactly like this was some grand hidden, nuanced, point that I really depended upon the reader to be able to infer from deep understanding.

    Here's what I said:




    Did you... did you even read what you were responding to? Or was your decision to mischaracterize it deliberate?
    And what you *STILL* won't get is that even by those standards which you claim defines all jobs as monopsynies, there are still jobs which are not.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    I don't have any issue with any investigation.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #428
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,519

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    If people have knowledge about open positions and pay, the hiring firms labor supply curve should be completely elastic, or have a slope of zero.
    That is a strawman - no one is arguing that the labor market is completely elastic anymore than you are claiming that the labor market is perfectly inelastic.

    In a competitive labor market, a single firm is a wage taker (not a wage maker!). This differs from the labor supply curve of the labor market itself, which should be upward sloping as workers would be more willing to work in positions that have higher pay.
    In a competitive market the wage earner is also a wage taker, as wage rates are produced by the competition between individual suppliers and demanders. You are simply describing changes in the supply relative to demand.

    The competitive labor market and the single firm should have a wage diagram as follows:

    Meh, sort of. If you are willing to assume no asymmetries, difficulty in changing jobs, unwillingness to change jobs, preference for promotion within rather than job-seeking abroad, equivalency of one LS worker for another, etc. so on and so forth.

    In the instance of monopsony, a single firms wage diagram becomes:

    So, the irony here is that I went and looked up your source for that:


    Now you are going to accuse me of not understanding the concept that a "dynamic monopsony means you can drop the single-firm assumption", and I'm going to reply again that that assumes that all workers and positions are equivalent, and that really you are simply describing what happens when the supply of labor is larger relative to demand - which is precisely what you would expect in a MW regime. When a price for something is artificially set at higher than what it would bring otherwise, you get a surplus of supply and a reduction in demand. If, for example, you insisted that Corn be sold at no less than $100 a bushel - well, you'd get a lot more people willing to produce corn at that rate than you would get people willing to buy at that rate, meaning that those who buy will be able to effectively insist on paying no more (or very little over) the $100 baseline.

    Do i need to explain why the wage in a competitive market will be higher than the wage in a labor market dominated by dynamic monopsony? Do i also have to explain why a minimum wage will essentially eliminate a monopsonistic wage?
    yes you definitely do, given that a minimum wage creates monopsonistic effects, as demand is reduced relative to supply.

  9. #429
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,519

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator
    That is a flat out lie. This discussion started when i replied to WSV's post stating that the low skilled labor market can be summed up by monopsony. This fictional response to Dittohead is of no consequence to our discussion.
    Actually it was imagep

    YOU came into this discussion in response to my response to Sangha, who was responding to my conversation with imagep. You did it right here at post 402. See how that is clearly you quoting post 400?

    But please. Tell me more about how you can't comment on my discussions with others... except when you comment on my discussions with others.

    After all of our exchanges these past few years, your posts reflect an entirely different reality. Clearly you are an intelligent guy, so why do you allow your ideology to substitute for your capacity to learn?
    1. Thank you - it's rare enough that opposing members are able to compliment each other. For my own side, I wish I had more of your background and experience.
    2. I think you are confusing "learning" with "agreeing with Kushinator".
    3. Ideology is how we think the world works. You have it, I have it, pretty much everyone who attempts to describe why things function has it. Partisanship is the desire to advance one's political cause even against concerns about accuracy or honesty. Our ideology is typically strengthened the more we learn, even as our partisanship is often weakened.

    My apologies for understanding the topic. Perhaps you can do better than claiming to understand a topic you clearly do not?
    I know enough about this topic to know that when you have low supply relative to demand, prices go up, and when you have high supply relative to demand, prices go down, and that neither of those is either an effective Monopoly or Monopsony, however much an economist may wish to "break ground" and write a paper. Sometimes, things are indeed complex. But this is not nearly as complex as you are trying to sell here.

  10. #430
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,519

    Re: Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recess

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    And what you *STILL* won't get is that even by those standards which you claim defines all jobs as monopsynies, there are still jobs which are not.
    Well that's an interesting claim. Please show me the job field where there are more individual companies hiring than individual workers.
    Last edited by cpwill; 12-18-14 at 10:39 AM.

Page 43 of 57 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •