Interesting graphic. Funny thing is that those who voted for the minimum wage hike, and those that support it like yourself, are the ones without a clue about how economics work. Basic economic theory: When wages increase, demand increases for standard goods, demand decreases for substandard goods, thus the price of standard goods goes up, and the price for substandard goods goes down. Supply will remain static. So what you are saying, effectively, is that you want to inflict artificial inflation on this nation’s working class? You also appear to be in support of stealing effectively $15,000 annual purchasing power from those in the middle class. If that’s the case, then I’m all for the 98% of republicans that voted against the minimum wage hike. How about instead of expecting others to pick up the tab for you, you go out and build your marketable skills and earn a better wage? That’s the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals appear to believe that society exists to provide success for those who cannot (or will not) provide for themselves. Conservatives believe that society exists to provide the opportunity and environment for others to succeed, but expect those individuals to provide for themselves.For instance: Instead of forcing the minimum wage to be $15 per hour (which hurts small employers in a large way, and hurts consumers even more), how about instead we invest in jobs training programs for people. Or coordinate/support day care services to allow single parents to work. Or grants/scholarships for qualified adult learners to retrain their skillsets to current market needs? Many people who work at these minimum wage-style jobs do so because they do not posses the skills needed to compete in today’s job market. So instead of treating the symptom (aka raising the minimum wage), why don’t we instead treat the disease (job skill lag)?
The 100% Democrats’ vote for SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY A HIGHER WAGE (by heavy-handed government mandate) ought to give voters a clue that the “generous” D party always votes to spend Other People’s Money….that is the reason we have a $17 Trillion national debt in the part that is counted! (unfunded liabilities are not counted but are law and will keep spending).-The “country’s legitimate business” includes opposition voting by representatives in House and Senate who were elected to stem spending and cut taxes by the voters who gave them their seat in Congress. The Dem’s want no opposition, which makes them the Dictator Party.
I also would like to take a moment to thank you guys for being civil. This discourse we have is they way it’s supposed to work. Name calling and vitriol only serve to distract from the issue at hand.
so pea you say 100% of the democrats want to destroy the economy // what makes you think [?] that if employers are not hiring at current level they will rush out and hire at twice?
I’m not refuting the opinions of small business owners. Two points of contention to your poll, though. First, and probably more significantly, is that the minimum wage is suggested at 10.10 an hour, not 15. For a full-time employee, that’s nearly a $10,000 annual difference. Secondly, and more to the point, is what about the other 40% that do not agree with it? We aren’t talking about legislation about regulations. We’re not talking about a speed limit, or building a new road. We’re talking about the livelihoods of people. This simple change has the capacity put them out of business and cost them a means to feed their families. I also looked at the study itself, not just the blog post. Here’s what I find concerning: “This poll reflects an Internet survey of 500 small business owners across the nation, conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for Small Business Majority”As of 2010, there are 27.9 million small businesses in this country. 500 is not a very large sample. Also, if you look at the specific answers to the question, there is a split only amongst “somewhat favor” vs. "somewhat oppose. Both strongly favor and strongly oppose are about the same. Somewhat concerning is the fact that they do not identify in which geographic region these businesses are. Wages in San Francisco are bound to be higher than in Boise, simply because the cost of living is higher in San Fran than in Boise. So if you live in San Fran, and you see a 7.25 minimum wage, of course that’s going to be appalling. But in Boise, 7.25 is not a bad deal if the median wage is 9/hour and that’s in line with the cost of living.I could go on, but the poll is not comprehensive enough to be used in an argument that could impact over 11 million small businesses across the nation. So if we just apply the raw stats at face value, that’s 11 million businesses that are at risk of losing their jobs if they can’t absorb that large of an increase to the minimum wage. And that’s only at 10.10 an hour. What about $15? Indexing the minimum wage against inflation is not a bad idea. But that means historically averaged out, you will be looking at slower growth than what is suggested here. Because if indexed against inflation from its inception, instead of picking a point mid-stream where it was “at its best,” it means there is actually going to lower the wages. If you leave minimum wage alone as it stands today, and then just lock it to index with inflation, then I’m certain you would see overwhelming support for it. My VA benefits index against inflation, and my job provides me an annual raise that is pretty consistent with inflationary growth. I see no reason to prevent that from happening to those making minimum wage. Just be aware that it won’t have as significant of a positive impact that you believe it to have. And last thought: What if we approve say the 10.10 an hour increase, and then index it against inflation. What’s the next step if that’s still not enough of other people’s money? I highly doubt this is going to be the end of the conversation. Then it’s going to move on to 1.5x inflation, or 2x inflation. Etc. it will never end. People always want to blame others for the reason why they don’t make enough money. And the frustrating part is the people making the decisions aren’t the ones who end up paying the bill; it’s always someone else’s money that is given away. What right does government have to dictate these edicts without there being any consequence to them? That’s why I like Ron Johnson and Reid Ribble. They are business owners, that grew their businesses from the ground up. They know what it’s like to have changes inflicted upon them. Most of Congress is made up of attorneys… people who have never felt the pinch of making payroll.
Just a note to the ’toon: the radical right in the Repbulican sector are COUNTING ON their support base being stupid. There actually may be a less radical candidate or two out there still campaigning as “Republican”, but the Boehner/McConnell factons calls them “RINO”.
As Nixon used to say, “Let me say this about that.” And then he’d say essentially nothing. Obviously these Democrat candidates voted for Obama. Alison Lundergran Grimes was a Democratic delegate in 2012, and her delegation voted unanimously for the Wonderboy, so she’s just being coy and ridiculous.
^^ Yep. Luckily most of the stupid and lazy won’t bother showing up on Tuesday like they did for their inspiration Barry 0.The other 70% of intelligent people will vote and the Republicans will take over the Senate in a landslide.Even many Dems are sick of 0 and the Dems!
The ultra wealthy who vote Republican think they are smart because they are voting for their own interests, but those interests are only short term. In the long term, Republican policies cause economic disaster for the working majority as evidenced by the last 2 years of the GWB 43 administration. A working class person who votes Republican is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders.
Wraithkin over 9 years ago
Interesting graphic. Funny thing is that those who voted for the minimum wage hike, and those that support it like yourself, are the ones without a clue about how economics work. Basic economic theory: When wages increase, demand increases for standard goods, demand decreases for substandard goods, thus the price of standard goods goes up, and the price for substandard goods goes down. Supply will remain static. So what you are saying, effectively, is that you want to inflict artificial inflation on this nation’s working class? You also appear to be in support of stealing effectively $15,000 annual purchasing power from those in the middle class. If that’s the case, then I’m all for the 98% of republicans that voted against the minimum wage hike. How about instead of expecting others to pick up the tab for you, you go out and build your marketable skills and earn a better wage? That’s the fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals appear to believe that society exists to provide success for those who cannot (or will not) provide for themselves. Conservatives believe that society exists to provide the opportunity and environment for others to succeed, but expect those individuals to provide for themselves.For instance: Instead of forcing the minimum wage to be $15 per hour (which hurts small employers in a large way, and hurts consumers even more), how about instead we invest in jobs training programs for people. Or coordinate/support day care services to allow single parents to work. Or grants/scholarships for qualified adult learners to retrain their skillsets to current market needs? Many people who work at these minimum wage-style jobs do so because they do not posses the skills needed to compete in today’s job market. So instead of treating the symptom (aka raising the minimum wage), why don’t we instead treat the disease (job skill lag)?
kline0800 over 9 years ago
The 100% Democrats’ vote for SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY A HIGHER WAGE (by heavy-handed government mandate) ought to give voters a clue that the “generous” D party always votes to spend Other People’s Money….that is the reason we have a $17 Trillion national debt in the part that is counted! (unfunded liabilities are not counted but are law and will keep spending).-The “country’s legitimate business” includes opposition voting by representatives in House and Senate who were elected to stem spending and cut taxes by the voters who gave them their seat in Congress. The Dem’s want no opposition, which makes them the Dictator Party.
Wraithkin over 9 years ago
I also would like to take a moment to thank you guys for being civil. This discourse we have is they way it’s supposed to work. Name calling and vitriol only serve to distract from the issue at hand.
oneoldhat over 9 years ago
so pea you say 100% of the democrats want to destroy the economy // what makes you think [?] that if employers are not hiring at current level they will rush out and hire at twice?
Wraithkin over 9 years ago
I’m not refuting the opinions of small business owners. Two points of contention to your poll, though. First, and probably more significantly, is that the minimum wage is suggested at 10.10 an hour, not 15. For a full-time employee, that’s nearly a $10,000 annual difference. Secondly, and more to the point, is what about the other 40% that do not agree with it? We aren’t talking about legislation about regulations. We’re not talking about a speed limit, or building a new road. We’re talking about the livelihoods of people. This simple change has the capacity put them out of business and cost them a means to feed their families. I also looked at the study itself, not just the blog post. Here’s what I find concerning: “This poll reflects an Internet survey of 500 small business owners across the nation, conducted by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research for Small Business Majority”As of 2010, there are 27.9 million small businesses in this country. 500 is not a very large sample. Also, if you look at the specific answers to the question, there is a split only amongst “somewhat favor” vs. "somewhat oppose. Both strongly favor and strongly oppose are about the same. Somewhat concerning is the fact that they do not identify in which geographic region these businesses are. Wages in San Francisco are bound to be higher than in Boise, simply because the cost of living is higher in San Fran than in Boise. So if you live in San Fran, and you see a 7.25 minimum wage, of course that’s going to be appalling. But in Boise, 7.25 is not a bad deal if the median wage is 9/hour and that’s in line with the cost of living.I could go on, but the poll is not comprehensive enough to be used in an argument that could impact over 11 million small businesses across the nation. So if we just apply the raw stats at face value, that’s 11 million businesses that are at risk of losing their jobs if they can’t absorb that large of an increase to the minimum wage. And that’s only at 10.10 an hour. What about $15? Indexing the minimum wage against inflation is not a bad idea. But that means historically averaged out, you will be looking at slower growth than what is suggested here. Because if indexed against inflation from its inception, instead of picking a point mid-stream where it was “at its best,” it means there is actually going to lower the wages. If you leave minimum wage alone as it stands today, and then just lock it to index with inflation, then I’m certain you would see overwhelming support for it. My VA benefits index against inflation, and my job provides me an annual raise that is pretty consistent with inflationary growth. I see no reason to prevent that from happening to those making minimum wage. Just be aware that it won’t have as significant of a positive impact that you believe it to have. And last thought: What if we approve say the 10.10 an hour increase, and then index it against inflation. What’s the next step if that’s still not enough of other people’s money? I highly doubt this is going to be the end of the conversation. Then it’s going to move on to 1.5x inflation, or 2x inflation. Etc. it will never end. People always want to blame others for the reason why they don’t make enough money. And the frustrating part is the people making the decisions aren’t the ones who end up paying the bill; it’s always someone else’s money that is given away. What right does government have to dictate these edicts without there being any consequence to them? That’s why I like Ron Johnson and Reid Ribble. They are business owners, that grew their businesses from the ground up. They know what it’s like to have changes inflicted upon them. Most of Congress is made up of attorneys… people who have never felt the pinch of making payroll.
Dtroutma over 9 years ago
Just a note to the ’toon: the radical right in the Repbulican sector are COUNTING ON their support base being stupid. There actually may be a less radical candidate or two out there still campaigning as “Republican”, but the Boehner/McConnell factons calls them “RINO”.
manteo16nc over 9 years ago
As Nixon used to say, “Let me say this about that.” And then he’d say essentially nothing. Obviously these Democrat candidates voted for Obama. Alison Lundergran Grimes was a Democratic delegate in 2012, and her delegation voted unanimously for the Wonderboy, so she’s just being coy and ridiculous.
ConserveGov over 9 years ago
^^ Yep. Luckily most of the stupid and lazy won’t bother showing up on Tuesday like they did for their inspiration Barry 0.The other 70% of intelligent people will vote and the Republicans will take over the Senate in a landslide.Even many Dems are sick of 0 and the Dems!
spiffnspam over 9 years ago
The ultra wealthy who vote Republican think they are smart because they are voting for their own interests, but those interests are only short term. In the long term, Republican policies cause economic disaster for the working majority as evidenced by the last 2 years of the GWB 43 administration. A working class person who votes Republican is like a chicken voting for Col. Sanders.