Minimum Wage Laws Boosting Wages

Bullseye said:

Several academic studies back my position.

Click to expand...

Only those who were financed by someone with an agenda to prove. But I would like to take a peek at those studies, can you provide links to them?

TheEconomist said:

The United States was arguably getting the short end of the stick in its trade relation with China. It is true that free trade with China is not without its perks, especially if you are highly educated person: in that case, you do not need to worry about the added competition of low skill workers in China. …

Click to expand...

I have no ill will toward other nations’ populations but I’m unwilling to ignore the best interests of USA employees for those others.
The extent of a nation’s training and educational systems’ improvements will be reflected by no less extents of their economic improvements.
But annual trade deficits are always of some net detriment to their nation’s gross domestic production, (GDP). Lesser GDP indicates lesser jobs and wages than otherwise.

[Regarding President Trump’s tariffs?]:

TheEconomist said:

…We're talking about reducing, though not stopping trade with only one country, so you're talking about the fraction of a fraction of the value of domestic production... The impact [upon the USA?] is probably so small, it cannot be reliably measured. …

Click to expand...

I’m among the proponents of the improved trade policy described in Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article, Import certificates - Wikipedia .

I consider it superior to pure free trade and to tariff policies, Respectfully, Supposn

imagep said:

Only those who were financed by someone with an agenda to prove. But I would like to take a peek at those studies, can you provide links to them?

Click to expand...

Do your own work.

jpn said:

Actually I was trying to help you. If you can't write within the accepted rules of the English language, then it makes it really hard for people to understand what you're trying to convey.

For example, when TheEconomist wrote that this post of yours was "gibberish," I don't think he was being rude. He was being descriptive.

Click to expand...

lol. So what; I demure and consider what he wrote to be jibberish as well. See how easy that is on the Internet where everyone can type. You need vald rebuttals instead of the fallacy of ad hominem.

imagep said:

Actually, historically, just the opposite has happened. Increases in min wage have typically lead to lower unemployment. Even the Heritage Foundation agrees with this.

Click to expand...

There is no unemployment under true capitalism only underpayment. Only the right wing doesn't really really believe in Capitalism.

I'm Supposn said:

I have no ill will toward other nations’ populations but I’m unwilling to ignore the best interests of USA employees for those others.
The extent of a nation’s training and educational systems’ improvements will be reflected by no less extents of their economic improvements.
But annual trade deficits are always of some net detriment to their nation’s gross domestic production, (GDP). Lesser GDP indicates lesser jobs and wages than otherwise.

[Regarding President Trump’s tariffs?]: I’m among the proponents of the improved trade policy described in Wikipedia’s “Import Certificates” article, Import certificates - Wikipedia .

I consider it superior to pure free trade and to tariff policies, Respectfully, Supposn

Click to expand...

Why do businesses involved in trade complain about foreign practices when corporate welfare is alive and well in the US?

danielpalos said:

lol. So what; I demure and consider what he wrote to be jibberish as well. See how easy that is on the Internet where everyone can type. You need vald rebuttals instead of the fallacy of ad hominem.

Click to expand...

Great example of what I was talking about. Believe me, you're anything but "demure."

(I figure you won't get this so I'll explain: You meant to use the word "demur," but chose "demure," which has a different meaning entirely.)

jpn said:

Great example of what I was talking about. Believe me, you're anything but "demure."

(I figure you won't get this so I'll explain: You meant to use the word "demur," but chose "demure," which has a different meaning entirely.)

Click to expand...

hey, you are right; it got past the spell checker again. I really do, demur.

jpn said:

No, not a fraud. You obviously didn't notice that the graph in my post is year-over-year growth in GDP, not the quarterly figures. If you want to compare quarterly figures, then Q2 of 2018 would rank as 5th strongest Q of Obama presidency:

5.1% Q2 2014
4.9% Q3 2014
4.7% Q4 2011
4.5% Q4 2009

Calling Trump's unnecessary and destructive trade war a "win" is laughable. We're paying $28 billion to citizens hurt by Trump's tariffs, more than double what we paid to the auto industry to bail them out in 2008-9. And that was a loan, not a straight payment like for the damage by the trade war. The uncertainty cause by the US suddenly and for no good reason throwing up significant tariff walls has cause a decline in business investment and an economic headwind. The world trading regime will take decades to regain its balance, if ever.

The article you link to in no way supports the Trump boast about the best-ever economy. The article reads to me like it's (subtly) making fun of Trump's silly boast.

Click to expand...

I'm aware of those quarters and that even with them Obama's average GDP was 1.5%, about half of Trumps average.

I'm also aware that there were no Obama policies that improved the economy. Cheap fuel form Fracking , that Obama opposed, was the single biggest reason we had any growth at all during his time.

"a decline in business investment and an economic headwind" I guess you haven't been paying attention to the Market, wage growth, job growth.

Right now we have the highest the highest economic & consumer confidence in 50 years. It's a good thing most Americans disagree with your Opinions.

danielpalos said:

This should not be a problem for Labor in any at-will employment State with equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

We should be goading Capitalist's to go ahead and automate for the Capital bottom line and not be such socialists.

Standards of living must improve with any increase in market participation and a multiplier effect of Two or more.

Click to expand...

Why would anyone believe that is jibberish without any valid rebuttal? Simply claiming it is jibberish is a fallacy.

jpn said:

Actually I was trying to help you. If you can't write within the accepted rules of the English language, then it makes it really hard for people to understand what you're trying to convey.

For example, when TheEconomist wrote that this post of yours was "gibberish," I don't think he was being rude. He was being descriptive.

Click to expand...

Being descriptive about what? My argument? He needs a valid rebuttal not just ad hominems. It is called, being doctrinal not just full of fallacy.

Casca XV said:

I'm aware of those quarters and that even with them Obama's average GDP was 1.5%, about half of Trumps average.

I'm also aware that there were no Obama policies that improved the economy. Cheap fuel form Fracking , that Obama opposed, was the single biggest reason we had any growth at all during his time.

"a decline in business investment and an economic headwind" I guess you haven't been paying attention to the Market, wage growth, job growth.

Right now we have the highest the highest economic & consumer confidence in 50 years. It's a good thing most Americans disagree with your Opinions.

Click to expand...

Trump hasn't average 3%. He hasn't had a year yet where it hit 3%. I think it was something like 2.3% last year. The tax cuts helped growth because the tax cuts, along with increased spending, have increased the deficit. Our economy will remain strong, as long as our deficit spending remains strong. Just as soon as we start slashing that deficit, our economy will weaken and become more susceptible to recession.

jpn said:

This is very good news for the lowest income segment. The fact that it isn't causing job loss is especially welcome.

Raising the minimum wage is something people have to go around the Republican Party to pass, as Arkansas did. Even though a $15/hr wage is very popular across the nation, the Republican Party almost uniformly opposes it without regard to actual data showing their fears unwarranted.

Click to expand...

JPN, U.S. Congress's last proposed minimum wage bill, was a very good bill; refer to, https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/603 ,

IMO, Congressional parties' proposed drafts of bills would be improved if rater than referring to finite rates or amounts of nominal U.S. Dollars, they referred to some “adjusted” dollars and/or to ratio's between specific variables.
If proposed bills drafted in such an improved manner failed to me approved as passing both congressional houses, they could, without changing their wording, be reintroduced during future congressional sessions.
Democrats foolishly continue to propose a minimum rate of $15/hour they're incrementally over time. reducing the “real value” of their proposed minimum wage rate. This is to Republicans' advantage; many years' later, when they can no longer vote the bill down, Congress will finally pass a minimum rate that again will be “too little and too late”.

On the other hand if Democrats update their proposed minimum' rate of nominal dollars, they appear to be fickle or “doubling down” rather unrelentley “holding their course” and keeping their promises to USA's voters.
Similarly, there's no good reason for their proposing increasing the minimum by finite dollars over a finite number of years.
The Democrat's proposal should increase the minimum by 10% until the draft's proposed targeted rate's “adjusted”, (i.e. “real”) dollar's value is achieved with no regard for duration of time.
Respectfully, Supposn