|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: NospamNospam Date: Oct 21, 2006 08:27
Peter Bjørn Perlsø wrote:
> Robert Bunn twcny.rr.com> wrote:
> >>> MYTH #5: Raising the minimum wage will hurt small businesses.
>>>
>>> Wrong, again. A recent Gallup Poll revealed that 86 percent of small
>>> business...
|
| Show full article (1.24Kb) |
|
| | 8 Comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 21, 2006 09:44
The problem is, the existence of your "b" jobs supposes a monopsonistic
labor market for low wage jobs. After the Card and Krueger study, a lot
of research went into the proposition and found no evidence that such
exists. Therefore, the reasonable opinion is that there are *no* "b"
jobs.
|
| |
|
| | 7 Comments |
|
|
Author: Video61Video61 Date: Oct 21, 2006 11:06
Nospam wrote:
>> Your newsreader doesn't demarcate or attribute quoted material very
>> well. It makes your posts difficult to follow.
>>
>> (it works fine for me, and i like it this way.)
>
> Well, actually here "the Bunn" is right.
>
> There are some quotation standards everybody expects. And it is usefull to
> use the quotation most people expect, in order to make your idea easily
> understood. If no, many will just skip without reading what you have to
> say. And isn't it bad for some potential vary valuable idea to get lost
> because of ... quotation ?
>
> The second thought. The attitude:
> "(it works fine for me, and i like it this way.)"
> it is rather a libertarian attitude. Do you really want to be associated
> with this kind of "human Ferengi" ? ...
|
| Show full article (1.64Kb) |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: Video61Video61 Date: Oct 21, 2006 11:08
Peter Bjørn Perlsø wrote:
>> ok, i will bite. gross ignorance on how a modern economy works is
>> simply outrageous in todays world.
as usual, nothing.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Video61Video61 Date: Oct 21, 2006 11:13
Peter Bjørn Perlsø wrote:
> Robert Bunn twcny.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> That study was widely criticized by other economists for too short a
>>> time frame and too narrow a sample. Results in California, on the
>>> other
>>> hand, showed real harm directly attributable to that minimum wage
>>> hike.
>>>
>>> (that is another myth. it was not only proven once to be right, but it
>>> was rechecked again, and found to be right. your study was done by a
>>> free market type ideologue who lie, and distort, and would not know
>>> the
>>> truth if it bite him.
>>
>> So ... people who like free markets are liars, ideologues, and
>> all-around bad guys? What do you suggest, that we switch to a
>> regulated-economy communist system?
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: NospamNospam Date: Oct 21, 2006 12:30
Robert Bunn wrote:
> The problem is, the existence of your "b" jobs supposes a monopsonistic
> labor market for low wage jobs.
Your assertion is based on .............. what ?
You don't need a single buyer to drive wages down. It is enough to have
a job market where the supply is bigger that demand (aka unemployment >0)
And this was always the case in US.
> After the Card and Krueger study, a lot of research went into the
> proposition and found no evidence that such exists.
Since you have more that one company that pays minimum wage jobs, it is at
chicken's mind that there is no monopsonistic labor market for low wage
jobs. You don't need any study to show this, just look around.
> Therefore, the reasonable opinion is that there are *no* "b"
> jobs.
Since your argument is based on completely false assumption the conclusion
is not just not reasonable but entirely false.
You want more proof: In the last 6 years the productivity kept growing while
the real wages went down. The slice that went to proffits grew constantly
while the slice that went to labor declined in last 6 years.
|
| Show full article (1.26Kb) |
| 6 Comments |
|
|
Author: NospamNospam Date: Oct 21, 2006 12:32
> well why? because i can barely see, i have borderline glaucoma, i wear
> bifocals, but my doctor says i need trifocals but my weak eyes cannot
> take them, plus
Well, sorry to hear that.
|
| |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: Video61Video61 Date: Oct 21, 2006 13:20
Nospam wrote:
>> well why? because i can barely see, i have borderline glaucoma, i wear
>> bifocals, but my doctor says i need trifocals but my weak eyes cannot
>> take them, plus
>
> Well, sorry to hear that.
hey no problems. if i was upset, you would have known it:)
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 21, 2006 13:42
"Nospam" example.com> wrote in message
news:2203715.MONapDJruo@example.com...> Robert Bunn wrote:
>
>> The problem is, the existence of your "b" jobs supposes a
>> monopsonistic
>> labor market for low wage jobs.
>
> Your assertion is based on .............. what ?
> You don't need a single buyer to drive wages down. It is enough to
> have
> a job market where the supply is bigger that demand (aka unemployment
>>0)
> And this was always the case in US.
This is precisely the assertion that was tested: that the supply of
labor was sufficiently greater than the demand to give employers the
power to *act* as a monopsony even though they are technically not.
|
| Show full article (3.18Kb) |
| 5 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Robert BunnRobert Bunn Date: Oct 21, 2006 14:00
>
>
>
> Your newsreader doesn't demarcate or attribute quoted material very
> well. It makes your posts difficult to follow.
>
> (it works fine for me, and i like it this way.)
>
>
> tcq.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1161319102.902840.325320@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> How much of that is from people in desperation starting their own
>> small
>> businesses because they can't find jobs? How many of those businesses
>> last one year? Three? five?
> ...
|
| Show full article (3.96Kb) |
| 3 Comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
