re: Poli Board - Get your poop together Atlanta

You are a complete. fricking. Idiot.

quote:

---

You are a complete. fricking. Idiot.

---

Or in other words, you have literally no concept of how math or statistical evaluation works.

If you're making the assessment based on all of my comments in this thread, I'd love to see a breakdown of why you think that's the case. It would be an enjoyable 6 minutes seeing things through the mind of a lunatic. If you're basing it on a single post, try reading a bit more. I'm not even arguing *for* increased minimum wages... simply that the arguments made were factually incorrect.

quote:

---

This is true. It is false across the broad scale of the economy. But small businesses go out of business. Struggling businesses go out of business. Borderline industries go overseas or south across the border.

Walmart will be better than fine as it eliminates competition.
Home Depot will be better than fine as it eliminates competition.
Applebee's will be fine as it eliminates competition.

But to deny that businesses struggling with the lower minimum wage will be OK at neutral employment opportunities with a higher minimum wage is assinine.

---

More or less on the same page with you. It's just another reason why I think a blanket minimum wage increase is a poor solution. Businesses with low margins and low volumes are disproportionately impacted, which is then directly linked to the size of the low-skill workforce that they employ. Interestingly enough though, small restaurants likely not impacted by this unless the server's wage increases dramatically along with any proposed minimum wage increase as well. Can't really come up with a great example of a business that would be the "poster child" for the struggles here. Obviously small retailers would be in bad shape, but typically small scale retailers don't have large numbers of employees either.

As you said, larger employers would generally be able to weather the storm and as competition dies down, they'd actually benefit in most situations.

Because it's sooooo complicated, right?


Have fun selling insurance. Or getting a government job when you finally figure out how shitty your instincts are.

Solid cherry picking without actually addressing the underlying problems with your "point".

If you'll read through the thread, you'll understand that I've explicitly indicated that I don't believe raising the minimum wage accomplishes the goal that it's pointed at (or at least that it's sold as pointing at).

On the other hand, the idea that the market determines a the fair salary for all jobs is garbage. Inevitably, it's the same people complaining about "welfare leeches" who say that the open market determines a job's worth and that they need to get off their arse and be productive. If the market determining a job's worth actually worked, wage gaps would be less apparent for one thing. Employers dictate how much a job will pay for low skill job openings, at least in the current marketplace, and for the foreseeable future given that there is a greater supply of those workers than there are positions to be filled.

If you think of the open market from the potential job seeker's perspective, this same market you've just praised is then encouraging individuals to not work. Using my prior example of minimum wage for a part-time employee with roughly 30 hours a week (which is commonly how companies with 50 or more employees are able to get around the Employer Mandate). The gross income pre-health benefits was right around 10k annually with zero time taken off and no sick time. The alternative would be to take roughly $9,000 to not work and have benefits covered...

So the problem is then shifted to: We need to get rid of government handouts... frick those leeches on the system.

So let's evaluate that a little further. You have a portion of the population living at or below the accepted poverty level (where that should be is debatable but we can ignore that for our purposes). What are our options to help address it?

1) Pay them more: Minimum wage increase... bleh. See my commentary throughout this thread... it doesn't put the benefits in the hands of those that actually need it and the results are less than ideal

2) Help educate them and teach them skills so that they can then get "real career" jobs that pay greater than the minimum wage. Except they have little to no work experience and oh yeah, conservative legislation generally doesn't support any form of educational improvements or advancements for the general populace, but hell if we shouldn't scrap the public school system and give vouchers so that the individuals that can afford to send their kids to private schools can do it for less... (yes... there was an inane level of snark there... but frick that bitch DeVos. The voucher system flat out doesn't work and is disproportionately beneficial to those that can afford to take advantage of it. But you know... pull yourself up by your bootstraps.)

3) Keep giving them handouts, just increase the amount... Or frick it... everyone gets handouts... "Minimum Basic Income". Bleh. Bleh. Bleh. Save this for when our robot overlords take over.

4) Just say frick it and let them die... No welfare. No Medicaid. etc. Except this is the same "party" that by and large thinks that a single cell zygote or multi-celled embryo can constitute life and has a right to live. Some even if the sex that led to that conception was non-consensual.

5) Keep everything the same, but keep bitching that it's the all the poors fault... suckling at the teet of our great nation. God forbid we try and make any kind of change to upset the balance that has been set here. I mean, it's working so well.
(Somewhat tangential to the topic at hand... Take a look at Table 4... Who the frick lives in Wyoming?)

quote:

---

Wyoming
1% Threshold: $368,468
.01% Threshold: $16,294,136
Avg. .01% Income: $97,682,655

---

quote:

---

Have fun selling insurance. Or getting a government job when you finally figure out how shitty your instincts are.

---

You realize I probably paid more in taxes last year than you earned, right?

quote:

---

quote: What I mean is this: Unemployment goes up as minimum wage increases. The liberals have a hard on for a "living wage" (whatever that means) but doing so potentially puts more people out of work. So you just misstated what you were trying to say. That is a demand side decrease, not an increase in the supply. Now, to address what you *meant*, I'll maybe say it a little less forcefully, but there isn't really data to support the claim. Here's a decent plot from 2013 taking into account locations with varied minimum wages and their corresponding unemployment rates. To get a little nerdy for a moment, the R2 (coefficient of determination/correlation) is 0.002. This number will always fall between 0 and 1 and can be most easily viewed as a percentage of correlation between 0 and 100%... in the case of this one that would be 0.2%... To be completely fair, studies involving human behavior will generally have low R2 values, but at a value of 0.2% that's tremendously low, indicating little to no correlation.

---

Just saving this fossil for archeological purposes in case you sober up tomorrow and try to delete it.

Pretend this post doesn't exist. Carry on.

quote:

---

the R2 (coefficient of determination/correlation) is 0.002. This number will always fall between 0 and 1 and can be most easily viewed as a percentage of correlation between 0 and 100%... in the case of this one that would be 0.2%... To be completely fair, studies involving human behavior will generally have low R2 values, but at a value of 0.2% that's tremendously low, indicating little to no correlation.

---

L
O
S
E
R

quote:

---

Posted by Jefferson Dawg online on 4/15/17 at 12:29 am to fibonaccisquared quote: the R2 (coefficient of determination/correlation) is 0.002. This number will always fall between 0 and 1 and can be most easily viewed as a percentage of correlation between 0 and 100%... in the case of this one that would be 0.2%... To be completely fair, studies involving human behavior will generally have low R2 values, but at a value of 0.2% that's tremendously low, indicating little to no correlation. L O S E R

---

Well given that I've explicitly argued against increasing the minimum wage, they definitely are not. But arguing against the minimum wage doesn't mean that I have to believe our agree with factually incorrect arguments that support my point.