View Poll Results: Which do you prefer:

Voters
197. You may not vote on this poll
  • Income tax - no changes in the status quo

    39 19.80%
  • Flat tax - Everyone pays the same %

    67 34.01%
  • National sales tax - don't spend, you don't pay taxes

    47 23.86%
  • No tax - Unconstitutional - rely on private donations

    10 5.08%
  • Other - explain

    21 10.66%
  • Cookies!

    13 6.60%
Page 31 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2129303132334181 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 899

Thread: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

  1. #301
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    A study which purports to show (looking only at correlation to unemployment rates and no other possible factors) that raising a minimum wage doesn't cause comapnies to fire people in good economic times (judging by unemployment rates stated) has what do with how it will affect companies' decisions to hire people in an uncertain economy?
    See my post above.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #302
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Total strawman. Has nothing to do with the point being made in all this.
    Since no one has presented evidence of a more complete study, I will stick to the finding of the one I referenced.

    "there is no valid, research-based rationale for believing that state minimum wages cause measurable job losses. Making the extreme case that the job losses are severe enough to show up in a noticeably elevated state unemployment rate is a wild extension of a largely unfounded theory. "

    Employment and the Minimum Wage—Evidence from Recent State Labor Market Trends
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #303
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Your first link looks at one state, the research looked at one rate and did not consider other factors related to unemployment.
    Yea, it's called an in-depth analysis of how the living wage affected employment in a state that passed a living wage. That's an entirely valid study.

    The report I referenced studied 13 states and did consider the other factors.
    Your link looks at correlations. Correlation is not causation. I can't believe I have to explain this. The fact that it added more states does not change the fact that the analysis is ****ty.

    Your second link shows the net effect is positive -

    "We confirm our earlier findings that business assistance living wage laws boost wages of the lowest-wage workers, at the cost of some disemployment, but on net reduce urban poverty. Second, we expand the analysis of distributional effects beyond looking just at the poverty threshold. We do not find that living wages increase the depth of poverty among families that remain poor, and we find that families somewhat below and somewhat above the poverty line are also helped by living wages. Finally, we suggest that the poverty reductions generated by living wages may stem from income gains for individuals with higher wages or skills who are nonetheless in poor families, rather than for the lowest-wage or lowest-skill individuals. "
    Do words in English mean the same to you as they do to me?

    The question is whether "living wages" decrease employment. The article says: "We confirm our earlier findings that business assistance living wage laws boost wages of the lowest-wage workers, at the cost of some disemployment"

    Disemployment means lower employment.

    Your third link is an opinion piece.
    It's a piece from a nonprofit think tank that cites a study performed by a highly regarded economist.

    In fact, a new study by economist David Neumark finds that existing government employees are the primary beneficiaries of living wage laws.

    * This is the main reason why he finds that living wage laws raise local wages.
    * However, Neumark also finds that forcing up wages causes demand for labor to fall; thus while workers covered by the living wage law typically see a 3.5 percent increase in wages, there is a 7 percent increase in unemployment among low-wage workers.
    You object to that, but have no problem with your article, which is a piece from a nonprofit think tank written by a "researcher."

    Do you honestly prefer government assistance over a full-time worker earning a living wage?
    I would rather have two people earning $7/hr than one person earning $14/hr and one person unemployed. You?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  4. #304
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    The fact is: given a choice between an inexperienced unkempt dolt with dubious references and somebody with proven skills and work ethic, which do you think a businessman will hire and pay a living wage?

    On the other hand, the guy with proven skills and work ethic, in most free market economies, is going to be able to command a living wage with or without some arbitrary mandatory amount established by the government. I'm not going to be able to get him to work for me for a low minimum wage.

    However, I might hire that inexperienced unkempt dolt at a low minimum wage to do some unskilled labor. And if he figures out that he can improve on that if he cleans himself up, shows up for work on time, does an honest days' work, and begins learning some skills, he is likely to become somebody with proven skills and work ethic who can command a living wage.

    But you insist that I pay him more than he will be worth at the beginning, and I'm not going to hire him. That is even more the case in tough economic times when lots of people are needing jobs.
    Last edited by AlbqOwl; 01-12-10 at 02:50 AM.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  5. #305
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Since no one has presented evidence of a more complete study, I will stick to the finding of the one I referenced.

    "there is no valid, research-based rationale for believing that state minimum wages cause measurable job losses. Making the extreme case that the job losses are severe enough to show up in a noticeably elevated state unemployment rate is a wild extension of a largely unfounded theory. "

    Employment and the Minimum Wage—Evidence from Recent State Labor Market Trends
    OK, aside from the fact that your study is based on correlation, and doesn't even bother with what might be differing economic factors in the states studied BESIDES the wage laws . . .

    Did you miss the part where I'm talking about disincenting hiring in a recessed environment, and not about people being fired during a period of job growth? You can cite this study until the cows come home, but it has no relevance to what I was arguing, nor the economic climate we find ourselves in.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #306
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    [quote=RightinNYC;1058481389]

    Your link looks at correlations. Correlation is not causation.
    I guess you missed that the regressive analysis also utilized as well as the government records examination.

    Do words in English mean the same to you as they do to me?
    Apparently not.

    The question is whether "living wages" decrease employment. The article says: "We confirm our earlier findings that business assistance living wage laws boost wages of the lowest-wage workers, at the cost of some disemployment"
    Oh I see, its because you only look at the text to your liking. If we continue where you left off there:

    "but on net reduce urban poverty. Second, we expand the analysis of distributional effects beyond looking just at the poverty threshold. We do not find that living wages increase the depth of poverty among families that remain poor, and we find that families somewhat below and somewhat above the poverty line are also helped by living wages. Finally, we suggest that the poverty reductions generated by living wages may stem from income gains for individuals with higher wages or skills who are nonetheless in poor families, rather than for the lowest-wage or lowest-skill individuals. "

    And this you also ignored:

    "there is no valid, research-based rationale for believing that state minimum wages cause measurable job losses. Making the extreme case that the job losses are severe enough to show up in a noticeably elevated state unemployment rate is a wild extension of a largely unfounded theory. "
    Employment and the Minimum Wage—Evidence from Recent State Labor Market Trends

    I would rather have two people earning $7/hr than one person earning $14/hr and one person unemployed. You?
    I would rather have two people making a living wage than two that require public assistance to live. More people to pay taxes that way as well, making the tax burden less for the rest of us.
    Last edited by Catawba; 01-12-10 at 03:12 AM.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  7. #307
    I invented Human Nature
    Z3n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    05-13-12 @ 06:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,251

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Is living wage tax deductible? If it was it would keep the stress on the employer down and the quality of life of the worker would go up.
    Don't tread on me= Don't tread on my corporate masters

  8. #308
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I guess you missed that the regressive analysis also utilized as well as the government records examination.
    You really don't seem to get it - you can do as many regression analyses, pie charts, or powerpoints as you want, but if the underlying factors you're considering are no more complicated than looking at correlations, your analysis is still ****.

    Furthermore, your authors numbers seem to contradict his conclusions. Take a look at this chart:



    Your author looks at that and concludes that "As Figure 3 shows, the wage boosts in 1997 and 1999 were actually harbingers of falling unemployment."

    Really? Because I look at that chart and see that before Oregon instituted these artificial wage increases, it had an unemployment rate that was below or at the national average. After the wage increases, its unemployment rate was a full two points above the national average. Great work!

    Oh I see, its because you only look at the text to your liking. If we continue where you left off there:
    It's not about looking at the text that's to my liking, it's about looking at what's relevant to the topic we're discussing. We're not discussing "net urban poverty," we're discussing the impact of artificial wage floors on employment. If you want to change the topic, say so.

    And this you also ignored:
    You mean I ignored the unsourced claims from your article which is written by someone who doesn't appear capable of reading his own graph, and instead chose to believe the studies performed by Harvard PhD economists and Economics professors? Yes, that's right.

    I would rather have two people making a living wage than two that require public assistance to live.
    And I would like a fairy to bring me a hot fudge sundae right now, which is about as plausible. You can't just say "well, they should both make $14/hr!" and stamp your feet. The real world doesn't work like that.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #309
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    U.S. minimum wage hike a stimulus to economy

    "The study found that the bottom-rung pay increases will boost spending by $4.9 billion.

    Such findings counter conventional wisdom among economists, who tend to argue that mandated wage increases hurt businesses' bottom line, putting a crimp on hiring."

    "In the first increase in over a decade, the minimum wage was raised to $5.85 two years ago after a tough battle in Congress.

    The EPI study found the July 2007 minimum wage hike benefited over 700,000 families and added $1.7 billion in additional spending over the following year.

    A July 2008 increase benefited over 1.3 million families and added $3.1 billion in additional spending over the following year, the EPI analysts added."

    U.S. minimum wage hike a stimulus to economy: report | Reuters
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #310
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    U.S. minimum wage hike a stimulus to economy

    "The study found that the bottom-rung pay increases will boost spending by $4.9 billion.

    Such findings counter conventional wisdom among economists, who tend to argue that mandated wage increases hurt businesses' bottom line, putting a crimp on hiring."

    "In the first increase in over a decade, the minimum wage was raised to $5.85 two years ago after a tough battle in Congress.

    The EPI study found the July 2007 minimum wage hike benefited over 700,000 families and added $1.7 billion in additional spending over the following year.

    A July 2008 increase benefited over 1.3 million families and added $3.1 billion in additional spending over the following year, the EPI analysts added."

    U.S. minimum wage hike a stimulus to economy: report | Reuters
    I point out the flaws with your ****ty report and you ignore those points, instead trying to bolster your report's credibility by citing a study from the same think tank? One that still ignores the point we're discussing (employment) in favor of the unrelated "overall spending"?

    Also worth noting that it's a think tank that defines itself as follows:

    "The Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit Washington D.C. think tank, was created in 1986 to broaden the discussion about economic policy to include the interests of low- and middle-income workers. Today, with global competition expanding, wage inequality rising, and the methods and nature of work changing in fundamental ways, it is as crucial as ever that people who work for a living have a voice in the economic discourse.

    EPI was the first — and remains the premier — organization to focus on the economic condition of low- and middle-income Americans and their families.
    "
    and which your article notes is "the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think-tank based in Washington."

    Yea, it doesn't sound like they have a dog in the hunt at all.

    I also find it amusing that you don't even bat an eyelash at the fact that the article acknowledges the general consensus among economists that mandated wage increases decrease overall employment.
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 01-12-10 at 03:50 AM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 31 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2129303132334181 ... 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
  •