Job creation from a 1%er

[razerface]

if you paid a living wage they would not be eligible for the free stuff.......

sure they would,,,if they make min wage, no matter what it is,,,they would still be on the bottom,,,we have programs to help "people on the bottom"

reference your #5 above on welfare careers

 

[razerface]

Neither, The pimp is the middle man,the john is the end user or customer. Must be the hooker. Shes got the raw materials.

the pimp hired the hooker (job creator).
The hooker could have started her own business and been self-employed(job creator)

The john could have taken care of the need himself, but no job would have been created, and no money would change hands, proving that "demand" does not create jobs

 

[ironpony]

ok, I give up on you,,,you have no idea what wages are out here.

Oh, but I do. 2 companies with approx. 100 people total. One project right now with 60 people working. also interface with dozens of local small businesses.
Are there better out ther? yesAre there worse out there? Yes
make me a list of all your examples of companies paying minimum wage......
Wal Mart McD's BK Target and all the other mega corps minimum wage and no benies. but billion dollar bottom lines.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Dotn forget $15 an hour probably cost the employer about $25 an hour. TiIl he pays things like UC taxes,workmens comp. taxes,his share of SS taxes and employee benefits.

 

[ironpony]

sure they would,,,if they make min wage, no matter what it is,,,they would still be on the bottom,,,we have programs to help "people on the bottom"

not at the bottom, below a certain income.

 

[ironpony]

the pimp hired the hooker (job creator).
The hooker could have started her own business and been self-employed(job creator)

The john could have taken care of the need himself, but no job would have been created, and no money would change hands, proving that "demand" does not create jobs

the john is like the welfare recipient, unwilling to put in the time to get ahead.

 

[jharkin]

no money would change hands, proving that "demand" does not create jobs

Again you are back trying to prove that hte wealthy create all jobs by giving out "their" money. But where do "they" get it from? Where does it originate? Money doesnt just appear out of thin air...

.. or maybe it does? If Grisu was around we would be getting a lecture about now on how the Fed and big banks actually create the money out of nothing via lending.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

the pimp hired the hooker (job creator).
The hooker could have started her own business and been self-employed(job creator)

The john could have taken care of the need himself, but no job would have been created, and no money would change hands, proving that "demand" does not create jobs

Pimps collect commissions for security and representation and job placement ,sort of like a temp agency or "unions"

 

[ironpony]

Dotn forget $15 an hour probably cost the employer about $25 an hour. TiIl he pays things like UC taxes,workmens comp. taxes,his share of SS taxes and employee benefits.

more like 19.50/hr 30% front load

 

[ironpony]

Pimps collect commissions for security and representation and job placement ,sort of like a temp agency or "unions"

ya, pimp, johns, hooker probably not a good example of a business model.

 

[razerface]

Oh, but I do. 2 companies with approx. 100 people total. One project right now with 60 people working. also interface with dozens of local small businesses.
Are there better out ther? yesAre there worse out there? Yes
make me a list of all your examples of companies paying minimum wage......
Wal Mart McD's BK Target and all the other mega corps minimum wage and no benies. but billion dollar bottom lines.

you know YOUR companies wages. I will not do your research for you. If all small companies paid more then large ones,,we would not be talking about raising the min wage,,,since small companies are the majority,,,by far.

 

[jharkin]

no, it would mean that thousands of small companies would have to increase the cost of their products to cover those new expenses, so the income gained would at the same time, be lost to increased prices. Called inflation. Costs are passed on to the consumer.

Yes, you will pay more and you will raise your prices. Since the workers are earning more money they can afford the higher prices. That's inflation. Some inflation is good, necessary in fact to keep a growth based economy functioning, and as long as the population is growing the economy has to grow at pace to keep everyone employed.

When population finally peaks and then declines the economists are all going to be busy as hell trying to figure out how to make a steady state economy work in a no growth environment. Thats beyond my pay grade but its a problem we might have to deal with in some of our lifetimes. Maybe by then we will all sit at the beach while the robots and AI do the work and feed us.

I also have opinions on some of these people who you claim "spend it all" You are correct, I have seen it. Down at the bar,,buying beer and cigs,,,lottery tickets,,the list goes on and on. I have sat at the bar and listened to the whining about how they can't pay their bills,,,then they buy another beer. I have seen, and hired people who whine they can not pay their bills,,then have to fire them because they fail to show up every day at work. I offer a job,,,but require them to work. Not all people at the bottom are in this group, but a large percentage are.

The people with drive and ambition,, are just in the bottom group for a short time. Then they advance. The ones who stay there,,,are playing on your bleeding heart, so you will pay them, or give them, enough money and social programs so they are not required to work hard and advance. They make welfare a career. We now see 2nd and 3rd generation "welfare careers" Parents are showing their children how to do it.

Its not just my claim - its something you can look up in published statistics, the vast majority of personal savings in this country is from folks in the top income brackets.I have to look it up but I think its something like the entire bottom 50% of households save almost nothing at all.

Yes, there are people at the bottom who work the system. Always will be. But how is the solution to that keeping wages low so that they stay on assistance? How about we raise wages, but at the same time dont raise the income thresholds for assistance so that we lift more of those folks at the bottom up and off the assistance roles. I'm offering that as a real idea to try. Where is your idea/solution??? (other than complaining and just maintiaing the status quo that hurts us all).

 

[razerface]

not at the bottom, below a certain income.

that threshold would immediatly change if incomes were raised. Ever seen gov't give up tax money before? Inflation would go smoking across the land to take care of that.

There will ALWAYS be lower and higher incomes. It is unsolvable by rules. It must be solved by the individual worker as to how hard they want to work and succeed.

 

[razerface]

ya, pimp, johns, hooker probably not a good example of a business model.

tax free!

 

[ironpony]

that threshold would immediatly change if incomes were raised. Ever seen gov't give up tax money before? Inflation would go smoking across the land to take care of that.

There will ALWAYS be lower and higher incomes. It is unsolvable by rules. It must be solved by the individual worker as to how hard they want to work and succeed.

if they raise the threshold, govt gives away more money. If you get people working govt collects taxes. Govt would be collecting taxes at 15 hr instesd of paying out assistance.
Inflation is a necessary evil, Govt has artificially kept inflation very low, you see how good we are doing now(sarcasm)

 

[Ashful]

*yawn* Seems we're going in circles.

 

[jharkin]

*yawn* Seems we're going in circles.

there we agree

 

[ironpony]

*yawn* Seems we're going in circles.

more of an ellipse...

 

[ironpony]

there we agree

you east coasters have no idea of what we are going thru in the mid west..........

 

[razerface]

Its not just my claim - its something you can look up in published statistics, the vast majority of personal savings in this country is from folks in the top income brackets.I have to look it up but I think its something like the entire bottom 50% of households save almost nothing at all..

shrug,, i agreed with you. I just pointed out their priorities are one of the reasons they do not save anything. Buy the beer and lottery tickets,,,to hell with the rent or childs cloths. Too many easily available social programs are another. Do they need free phones at my expense?

Where is your idea/solution??? (other than complaining and just maintiaing the status quo that hurts us all).

I am not complaining,,,In the end,,people get what they work for, usually. If crumbs are what they want to work at getting,,give them crumbs. I have been telling you my solution for days! Leave min wage low enough so that people have the chance to enter the job market with no skills,,,learn a skill and move up the ladder instead of paying them to never advance,,,since there is no reason to do so.

Remember, nobody gets out alive,,,,so do whatever you want, but don't expect me to do it for you,,,,, I am busy

 

[Ashful]

you east coasters have no idea of what we are going thru in the mid west..........

Probably true, but you'd be as grumpy as us, if you had to deal with our traffic.

I am not complaining,,,In the end,,people get what they work for, usually. If crumbs are what they want to work at getting,,give them crumbs.

Amen. Well said.

 

[ironpony]

Probably true, but you'd be as grumpy as us, if you had to deal with our traffic.

I grew up in New York, that's why I live here now.....soon to be St.Croix

 

[Doug MacIVER]

It would mean a lot more money right back into the system buying the products and services you sell. People at the bottom spend every dollar they make and save almost nothing.

staples just announced closing 255 stores. 10% of their brick and mortar. the goes how many jobs with a fraction added due to internet sales, answer center probably in suburban city, take your pick india, china ??? not even min wages can save or preserve jobs.

 

[ironpony]

staples just announced closing 255 stores. 10% of their brick and mortar. the goes how many jobs with a fraction added due to internet sales, answer center probably in suburban city, take your pick india, china ??? not even min wages can save or preserve jobs.

right back to corporate greed, sales probably will not change and costs will decrease significantly. not sure what they pay or benefits but that is a lot of people out of work.

 

[Ehouse]

Yes, you will pay more and you will raise your prices. Since the workers are earning more money they can afford the higher prices. That's inflation. Some inflation is good, necessary in fact to keep a growth based economy functioning, and as long as the population is growing the economy has to grow at pace to keep everyone employed.

When population finally peaks and then declines the economists are all going to be busy as hell trying to figure out how to make a steady state economy work in a no growth environment. Thats beyond my pay grade but its a problem we might have to deal with in some of our lifetimes. Maybe by then we will all sit at the beach while the robots and AI do the work and feed us.




Its not just my claim - its something you can look up in published statistics, the vast majority of personal savings in this country is from folks in the top income brackets.I have to look it up but I think its something like the entire bottom 50% of households save almost nothing at all.

Yes, there are people at the bottom who work the system. Always will be. But how is the solution to that keeping wages low so that they stay on assistance? How about we raise wages, but at the same time dont raise the income thresholds for assistance so that we lift more of those folks at the bottom up and off the assistance roles. I'm offering that as a real idea to try. Where is your idea/solution??? (other than complaining and just maintiaing the status quo that hurts us all).

Eliminate all "thresh holds", "brackets", and other hard demarcation lines and go to a sliding scale with income "to the penny", and subsidy "to the penny". All you need to know is at what income the subsidy (or Tax for that matter) begins and ends. Picture a nice smooth set of intersecting curves in an hour glass shape. The node at the waist represents point of end subsidy/begin tax. Eliminate internal resentment and save a ton of money.