|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Les CargillLes Cargill Date: Oct 18, 2006 17:18
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:>>
>
>>>And since wages are not the only component of prices they will not go
>>>up as much.
>>
>>It has nothing to do with this as a component of prices. It has to do
>>with the fact that more people have more money to chase
>>goods with. The demand is the same, so price adjusts.
>
>
>
> Or manufacturers will decide to capture the increased demand by
> producing more.
That's always possible. It's always possible that a relatively
different new equilibrium will be reached, too.
|
| Show full article (1.10Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Les CargillLes Cargill Date: Oct 18, 2006 17:28
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:>>
>
>>>And given that only a portion of workers work minimum
>>>wage, only some products may go up.
>>
>>I do not wish to knock anybody, but minimum wage is a "safety
>>net" subsidy. This is pretty clear; almost nobody actually works for
>>minimum wage ( outside of very poor regions ). Around here, there's
>>a defacto minimum wage of about $7.50.
>
>
> Of course its a safety net issue.
But that's why an increase does not generally create unemployment.
And as subsidies go, it's one of my favorites - it helps
people who might not otherwise seek employment.
|
| Show full article (2.03Kb) |
|
| | 5 Comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 18, 2006 17:53
comcast.net> wrote in message
news:9hddj25n0pgv61esk4uuobafglfgurcvq7@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:>>
>>> And since wages are not the only component of prices they will not
>>> go
>>> up as much.
>>
>>It has nothing to do with this as a component of prices. It has to do
>>with the fact that more people have more money to chase
>>goods with. The demand is the same, so price adjusts.
>
>
> Or manufacturers will decide to capture the increased demand by
> producing more. You seem intent on only working your favorite variable
> at a time.
>
|
| Show full article (1.06Kb) |
| 194 Comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 18, 2006 18:30
>> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
>> wrote:>>>
>>
>>>>And given that only a portion of workers work minimum
>>>>wage, only some products may go up.
>>>
>>>I do not wish to knock anybody, but minimum wage is a "safety
>>>net" subsidy. This is pretty clear; almost nobody actually works for
>>>minimum wage ( outside of very poor regions ). Around here, there's
>>>a defacto minimum wage of about $7.50.
>>
>>
>> Of course its a safety net issue.
>
> But that's why an increase does not generally create unemployment. ...
|
| Show full article (2.42Kb) |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 18, 2006 18:54
"Nospam" example.com> wrote in message
news:105582992.d6xdt7NNND@example.com...> Les Cargill wrote:
>
>> It will not make any difference whatsoever. As soon as the minimum
>> wage rises, the stuff people who make minimum wage buy goes up
>> proportionally.
>
> 1. Yes, they will rise since the demand increase. But not "as soon".
> Prices do have an inertia often called "stickiness". The period betwen
> the
> rise of the wages and the rise of the prices it is a net gain for
> people.
> That period, will count with a less disparity in income, fueling up
> the
> economy.
|
| Show full article (4.87Kb) |
| 10 Comments |
|
|
Author: NospamNospam Date: Oct 18, 2006 19:37
Robert Bunn wrote:
> This period is a net gain for minimum wage earners. To get an idea how
> sticky prices are, observe how long it took for gas prices to rise at
> the commencement of the war in Iraq.
The oil prices is a very bad example. There isn't a real competition on the
oil market as on many others. Well, the advent of multinational
corporations try to destroy the competition in everything else too, but
this is another subject.
In general, if you have real competition the prices are going to be pretty
sticky. Just loot that despite the fact that oil prices grew almost 2 times
in last 6 years, the prices of goods manufactured from or with a lot of oil
didn't. If they grew, they did 5..20%% not 100%% as the oil/gas did.
Nice try, but not quite. The competition can keep prices sticky.
This is the core reason we should oppose all these mega-mergers that happen
in the last 5 years. They are clear anticompetitive actions taken to
destroy the market competition.
> Wages are far stickier than prices.
|
| Show full article (3.75Kb) |
| 9 Comments |
|
|
Author: maxweltonmaxwelton Date: Oct 18, 2006 19:38
Robert Bunn wrote:
> comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:9hddj25n0pgv61esk4uuobafglfgurcvq7@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
>> wrote:>>>
>>>> And since wages are not the only component of prices they will not
>>>> go
>>>> up as much.
>>>
>>>It has nothing to do with this as a component of prices. It has to do
>>>with the fact that more people have more money to chase
>>>goods with. The demand is the same, so price adjusts.
>>
>>
>> Or manufacturers will decide to capture the increased demand by
>> producing more. You seem intent on only working your favorite variable
>> at a time.
>> ...
|
| Show full article (1.12Kb) |
| 178 Comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 18, 2006 19:55
> Robert Bunn wrote:
>> comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:9hddj25n0pgv61esk4uuobafglfgurcvq7@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:46:35 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
>>> wrote:>>>>
>>>>> And since wages are not the only component of prices they will
>>>>> not
>>>>> go
>>>>> up as much.
>>>>
>>>>It has nothing to do with this as a component of prices. It has to
>>>>do
>>>>with the fact that more people have more money to chase
>>>>goods with. The demand is the same, so price adjusts.
>>>
>>> ...
|
| Show full article (2.19Kb) |
| 177 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Les CargillLes Cargill Date: Oct 18, 2006 20:30
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 00:28:27 GMT, Les Cargill cfl.rr.com>
> wrote:>>
>
>>>Of course its a safety net issue.
>>
>>But that's why an increase does not generally create unemployment.
>>And as subsidies go, it's one of my favorites - it helps
>>people who might not otherwise seek employment.
>>
>>I'm optomistic about these things because I spent my early
>>20's during the "Repo Man" era of the early '80s. Turned
>>out fine - but it was looking *scary* then.
>
>
> Ah we largely agree. I misunderstood.
>
|
| Show full article (2.33Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
