Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exposes corrupt “orientation”

124

Comments

  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,774 Swaye's Wigwam

    2001400ex said:

    I can assure you that people have been replaced by machines long before a $15 minimum wage and the minimum wage at the McDonalds across the street from Disneyland isn’t $15.

    Automation is inevitable. Your argument that people shouldn’t be paid more because they’ll be replaced by machines that are replacing them anyways is either ignorant or disingenuous.

    I said the prospects of $15/hr. That will be the wage in 2022. Weird how businesses plan ahead...

    How many remedial $15/hr jobs can be done by machines? 90%? The only thing minimum wage does is put people out of work. You actually hurt the people you are trying to help. This APAG is what ignorance is...
    Got any evidence of that? Remember when they said it would destroy jobs in downtown Seattle? What do you think had happened since minimum wage came in? It sure as fuck didn't actually kill jobs.
    What kind of jobs are you talking about? I can assure you that it's harmed the lower-wage earners. Remember when the City of Seattle and its disgraced pedophile Mayor paid UW to do a study on the effects of $15/hr, UW did the study and it didn't say what the city wanted it to say and the city ended up burying it?

    https://seattletimes.com/business/uw-study-finds-seattles-minimum-wage-is-costing-jobs/

    Seattle’s minimum-wage law is boosting wages for a range of low-paid workers, but the law is causing those workers as a group to lose hours, and it’s also costing jobs, according to the latest study on the measure passed by the City Council in 2014.

    The report, by members of the University of Washington team studying the law’s impacts for the city of Seattle, is being published Monday as a working paper by a nonprofit think tank, the National Bureau of Economic Research.
    Damn, should have gone to page 2, oh well, I've cited this study and others so many times but @allpurpleallgold and honda have got their blinders on.
    It’s actually hilarious that you’re popping off in one thread about how you’ll pick a study apart and then linking to an article that picks the study you like apart.
    Hahahaha JC

    From the article
    [The team concluded that the second jump had a far greater impact, boosting pay in low-wage jobs by about 3 percent since 2014 but also resulting in a 9 percent reduction in hours worked in such jobs. That resulted in a 6 percent drop in what employers collectively pay — and what workers earn — for those low-wage jobs.

    For an average low-wage worker in Seattle, that translates into a loss of about $125 per month per job.

    “If you’re a low-skilled worker with one of those jobs, $125 a month is a sizable amount of money,” said Mark Long, a UW public-policy professor and one of the authors of the report. “It can be the difference between being able to pay your rent and not being able to pay your rent.”

    The report also estimated that there are about 5,000 fewer low-wage jobs in the city than there would have been without the law.]
    Michael Reich, a UC Berkeley economics professor who was lead author on the Berkeley report, said he found the UW team’s report not credible for a number of reasons.

    He said the UW researchers’ “synthetic” Seattle model draws only from areas in Washington that are nothing like Seattle, and the report excludes multisite businesses, which employ a large percentage of Seattle’s low-paid workforce. The latter fact was also problematic, he said, because that meant workers who left single-site businesses to work at multisite businesses were counted as job losses, not job gains in the UW study.

    Reich also thought the $19 threshold was too low, and he said the UW researchers’ report “finds an unprecedented impact of wage increases on jobs, ten times more than in hundreds of minimum wage and non-minimum wage studies. … “There is no reason,” he said, that Seattle’s employers of low-paid workers “should be so much more sensitive to wage increases.”


    jajajajajaja jc
    You're actually reading! I'm proud of you. You've stepped past stage 1 parroting!

    Now read the next part of the report where they respond to the (super left leaning)Berkeley team criticism and expound on the reasons for their methodology. Congratulations, this is how academics works.
  • 2001400ex2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    I can assure you that people have been replaced by machines long before a $15 minimum wage and the minimum wage at the McDonalds across the street from Disneyland isn’t $15.

    Automation is inevitable. Your argument that people shouldn’t be paid more because they’ll be replaced by machines that are replacing them anyways is either ignorant or disingenuous.

    I said the prospects of $15/hr. That will be the wage in 2022. Weird how businesses plan ahead...

    How many remedial $15/hr jobs can be done by machines? 90%? The only thing minimum wage does is put people out of work. You actually hurt the people you are trying to help. This APAG is what ignorance is...
    Got any evidence of that? Remember when they said it would destroy jobs in downtown Seattle? What do you think had happened since minimum wage came in? It sure as fuck didn't actually kill jobs.
    Holy shit, I've literally linked the academic study that shows that $15/hr minimum did in fact reduce low wage jobs in Seattle.

    Seattle Times summary w/ link to the study in it.
    UW Study Finds Seattle's Minimum Wage is Costing Jobs

    p.s. it also actually reduces low wage workers take home pay bc businesses simply reduce the hours they work.
    Yes I'm aware of what the UW study said. And yes that was over 18 months ago and yes minimum wage wasn't even up to $15 an hour then. And no businesses don't just reduce hours worked. Any business owner that reduces hours and thus reduces customer service, is pretty fucktarded. They aren't having anyone work any more hours than they have to regardless of whether it's $15 or $10.

    It's clear you understand what is taught in economics in school and you've never actually ran a business.
    If only the owner of this business actually ran a business... you fucking idiot.

    http://mynorthwest.com/491148/louisas-owner-seattle-too-expensive/?

    https://www.seattletimes.com/life/food-drink/eastlake-bakery-and-cafe-louisas-suddenly-closes/
    Did you read the article, she's making my exact point. 1) she said there was other ongoing issues. 2) she said the business isn't the type of business to bring in enough revenue.

    There's 50,000 new jobs downtown... If a $1 change in wages is what takes your business down, there's obviously other factors.

    You are better than that Mike.
    I’m better than that, you clearly aren’t and have a hard time with any complex or mutlivariant analysis.
    That makes me chuckle when you are trying to pin the closing of that business on one factor.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited December 2018
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    I can assure you that people have been replaced by machines long before a $15 minimum wage and the minimum wage at the McDonalds across the street from Disneyland isn’t $15.

    Automation is inevitable. Your argument that people shouldn’t be paid more because they’ll be replaced by machines that are replacing them anyways is either ignorant or disingenuous.

    I said the prospects of $15/hr. That will be the wage in 2022. Weird how businesses plan ahead...

    How many remedial $15/hr jobs can be done by machines? 90%? The only thing minimum wage does is put people out of work. You actually hurt the people you are trying to help. This APAG is what ignorance is...
    Got any evidence of that? Remember when they said it would destroy jobs in downtown Seattle? What do you think had happened since minimum wage came in? It sure as fuck didn't actually kill jobs.
    Holy shit, I've literally linked the academic study that shows that $15/hr minimum did in fact reduce low wage jobs in Seattle.

    Seattle Times summary w/ link to the study in it.
    UW Study Finds Seattle's Minimum Wage is Costing Jobs

    p.s. it also actually reduces low wage workers take home pay bc businesses simply reduce the hours they work.
    Yes I'm aware of what the UW study said. And yes that was over 18 months ago and yes minimum wage wasn't even up to $15 an hour then. And no businesses don't just reduce hours worked. Any business owner that reduces hours and thus reduces customer service, is pretty fucktarded. They aren't having anyone work any more hours than they have to regardless of whether it's $15 or $10.

    It's clear you understand what is taught in economics in school and you've never actually ran a business.
    If only the owner of this business actually ran a business... you fucking idiot.

    http://mynorthwest.com/491148/louisas-owner-seattle-too-expensive/?

    https://www.seattletimes.com/life/food-drink/eastlake-bakery-and-cafe-louisas-suddenly-closes/
    Did you read the article, she's making my exact point. 1) she said there was other ongoing issues. 2) she said the business isn't the type of business to bring in enough revenue.

    There's 50,000 new jobs downtown... If a $1 change in wages is what takes your business down, there's obviously other factors.

    You are better than that Mike.
    I’m better than that, you clearly aren’t and have a hard time with any complex or mutlivariant analysis.
    That makes me chuckle when you are trying to pin the closing of that business on one factor.
    When did I say it was the only factor? Fuck head. Was it the last straw? Maybe.

    All this from you who says Seattle unemployment didn’t go down after the minimum wage increase that proves was a good idea.
  • SledogSledog Member Posts: 33,839 Standard Supporter
    No answer from Hondo. Liberal hypocrisy. Thee not me!

    Same shit. Same commies.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    Oh look more anecdotal evidence.

    [As to how the UW team’s findings jibe with the Seattle area’s very low unemployment rate, tight labor market, and anecdotes from hospitality employers desperately seeking low-wage workers, Vigdor said that, based on data and what he’s hearing from employers, businesses are looking to hire those with more experience.

    “Traditionally, a high proportion of workers in the low-wage market are not experienced at all: teens with their first jobs, immigrants with their first jobs here,” he said. “Data is pointing to: Since we have to pay more, employers are looking for people with experience who can do the job from Day 1.”]

    With an increase in supply(artificial price increase) and a decrease in demand employers can be selective for even minimum wage jobs.

    This is happening in California where we also increased the minimum wage. I've actually been watching this squeeze a number of our friends with shoe shine degrees that are "artists" & "actors". You've gotta have at least 5 yrs experience, a clean record, and be willing to jump through a bunch of hoops just to get a job as a barista working for minimum wage plus tips. Mind you, you'll still be working less than 30 hours so that they don't have to give you benefits(per artificial state law) and you'll have a hard time picking up a second job because no one wants to(or has to) put up with an employee with two jobs and a schedule conflict. Don't like it? Fuck you, someone else will happily take the job because supply outpaces demand when the government creates a price floor. It's almost like basic economics has some grounding in reality.

    Of course, none of this is the fault of the government's artificial economic planning, it's all just greedy corporations so we actually need moar regulation of the already highly regulated labor market.

    It also ensures lots of people working for minimum wage are stuck on government benefits and will continue to vote for the people making them dependent on those benefits.

    Oh look more anecdotal evidence. Well I talked to all my friends in California and Washington and they said everything you’ve said is false. It’s almost like this is the internet and I can just say shit.

    We can keep bickering about this but truth is it’s irrelevant. A bunch of politicians ran on your bullshit, they called themselves the tea party, and where are they now? Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,203
    Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?

    Imagine that, people support getting "free" shit. I wonder what would happen to that 70% number when people were confronted with the amount their taxes would have to be raised in order to pay for it. Something tells me those numbers wouldn't go up.
  • UW_Doog_BotUW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,774 Swaye's Wigwam

    Oh look more anecdotal evidence.

    [As to how the UW team’s findings jibe with the Seattle area’s very low unemployment rate, tight labor market, and anecdotes from hospitality employers desperately seeking low-wage workers, Vigdor said that, based on data and what he’s hearing from employers, businesses are looking to hire those with more experience.

    “Traditionally, a high proportion of workers in the low-wage market are not experienced at all: teens with their first jobs, immigrants with their first jobs here,” he said. “Data is pointing to: Since we have to pay more, employers are looking for people with experience who can do the job from Day 1.”]

    With an increase in supply(artificial price increase) and a decrease in demand employers can be selective for even minimum wage jobs.

    This is happening in California where we also increased the minimum wage. I've actually been watching this squeeze a number of our friends with shoe shine degrees that are "artists" & "actors". You've gotta have at least 5 yrs experience, a clean record, and be willing to jump through a bunch of hoops just to get a job as a barista working for minimum wage plus tips. Mind you, you'll still be working less than 30 hours so that they don't have to give you benefits(per artificial state law) and you'll have a hard time picking up a second job because no one wants to(or has to) put up with an employee with two jobs and a schedule conflict. Don't like it? Fuck you, someone else will happily take the job because supply outpaces demand when the government creates a price floor. It's almost like basic economics has some grounding in reality.

    Of course, none of this is the fault of the government's artificial economic planning, it's all just greedy corporations so we actually need moar regulation of the already highly regulated labor market.

    It also ensures lots of people working for minimum wage are stuck on government benefits and will continue to vote for the people making them dependent on those benefits.

    Oh look more anecdotal evidence. Well I talked to all my friends in California and Washington and they said everything you’ve said is false. It’s almost like this is the internet and I can just say shit.

    We can keep bickering about this but truth is it’s irrelevant. A bunch of politicians ran on your bullshit, they called themselves the tea party, and where are they now? Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?
    It was an observation which was never meant to be more than anecdote that related my experience to actual empirical evidence in a study. Of which, you have never provided anything to the contrary.

    What's hilarious is that you call that out as invalid and then resort to a bandwagon fallacy based solely on your opinion that the policy you advocate for is more popular. Except that if it was, it would already be more widespread and furthermore, popular doesn't make something right or true. A majority of the population can buy the flat earth theory. The earth will still won't be round.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,203
    2001400ex said:
    And your point is what? That people are shitty at math? I think it would be great if you bought me a house at the beach Hondo, and the benefit to me would definitely outweigh the cost. Pay up deadbeat!
  • RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,790 Founders Club
    People liked Obamacare when it saved them 2500 and they got to keep their doctor

    People are stupid
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771

    Oh look more anecdotal evidence.

    [As to how the UW team’s findings jibe with the Seattle area’s very low unemployment rate, tight labor market, and anecdotes from hospitality employers desperately seeking low-wage workers, Vigdor said that, based on data and what he’s hearing from employers, businesses are looking to hire those with more experience.

    “Traditionally, a high proportion of workers in the low-wage market are not experienced at all: teens with their first jobs, immigrants with their first jobs here,” he said. “Data is pointing to: Since we have to pay more, employers are looking for people with experience who can do the job from Day 1.”]

    With an increase in supply(artificial price increase) and a decrease in demand employers can be selective for even minimum wage jobs.

    This is happening in California where we also increased the minimum wage. I've actually been watching this squeeze a number of our friends with shoe shine degrees that are "artists" & "actors". You've gotta have at least 5 yrs experience, a clean record, and be willing to jump through a bunch of hoops just to get a job as a barista working for minimum wage plus tips. Mind you, you'll still be working less than 30 hours so that they don't have to give you benefits(per artificial state law) and you'll have a hard time picking up a second job because no one wants to(or has to) put up with an employee with two jobs and a schedule conflict. Don't like it? Fuck you, someone else will happily take the job because supply outpaces demand when the government creates a price floor. It's almost like basic economics has some grounding in reality.

    Of course, none of this is the fault of the government's artificial economic planning, it's all just greedy corporations so we actually need moar regulation of the already highly regulated labor market.

    It also ensures lots of people working for minimum wage are stuck on government benefits and will continue to vote for the people making them dependent on those benefits.

    Oh look more anecdotal evidence. Well I talked to all my friends in California and Washington and they said everything you’ve said is false. It’s almost like this is the internet and I can just say shit.

    We can keep bickering about this but truth is it’s irrelevant. A bunch of politicians ran on your bullshit, they called themselves the tea party, and where are they now? Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?
    It was an observation which was never meant to be more than anecdote that related my experience to actual empirical evidence in a study. Of which, you have never provided anything to the contrary.

    What's hilarious is that you call that out as invalid and then resort to a bandwagon fallacy based solely on your opinion that the policy you advocate for is more popular. Except that if it was, it would already be more widespread and furthermore, popular doesn't make something right or true. A majority of the population can buy the flat earth theory. The earth will still won't be round.
    It’s not my opinion that those policies are more popular it’s polling data. And I didn’t say it makes me right, I said it makes our bickering irrelevant. If people think the earth is flat and you know it’s round, what good is that if you can’t convince people that it’s round? Libertarians can’t convince people that the earth is flat or round. And look maybe my side will never get through progressive policies, we’ll see. But at least we have relevance and are trending upwards and not a punchline from 10 years ago.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,203
    You’re still a punchline, the fact that you’ve been able to sway a bunch of economic and historical illiterates doesn’t remove the fact that you’re still a joke.
  • allpurpleallgoldallpurpleallgold Member Posts: 8,771
    SFGbob said:

    You’re still a punchline, the fact that you’ve been able to sway a bunch of economic and historical illiterates doesn’t remove the fact that you’re still a joke.

    You are entitled to your opinion.
  • MikeDamoneMikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    edited December 2018
    SFGbob said:

    Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?

    Imagine that, people support getting "free" shit. I wonder what would happen to that 70% number when people were confronted with the amount their taxes would have to be raised in order to pay for it. Something tells me those numbers wouldn't go up.

    I’m in favor of a law paying me $3million a year and covering all my expenses.
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,203

    SFGbob said:

    You’re still a punchline, the fact that you’ve been able to sway a bunch of economic and historical illiterates doesn’t remove the fact that you’re still a joke.

    You are entitled to your opinion.
    I've got 100 plus years of human history to back me up while you have what? Your feelings?
  • SFGbobSFGbob Member Posts: 32,203

    SFGbob said:

    Meanwhile the majority of Americans support raising the minimum wage and 70% support Medicare for all. So you can keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room but what good is it when you can’t convince other people that you’re right?

    Imagine that, people support getting "free" shit. I wonder what would happen to that 70% number when people were confronted with the amount their taxes would have to be raised in order to pay for it. Something tells me those numbers wouldn't go up.

    I’m in favor of a law paying me $3million a year and covering all my expenses.
    I'll bet you could get a majority of Americans to support such a law. Free lunch for everyone!!!
  • whlinderwhlinder Member Posts: 4,779 Standard Supporter

    Swaye said:

    Sledog said:


    When mockery reaches this sort of absurd threshold, it just tells me that people are afraid of her.
    She is going to probably wind up a star. Look, I think she is dumb as a bag of hammers, but so is Trump, and it's worked out fine for him. APAG nailed it (lulz) I think when he said her brown skin, telegenic looks and demographics shifts over the next decade would propel her. I don't want to see her in power, but I bet it happens. I will most likely hate her unless she moderates, but who knows? I do like her ass right now.
    Agree with all except Trump isnt dumb as a bag of hammers. He has a massive ego and integrity problem but he ain't dumb.
    But is his integrity problem well documented?
  • WestlinnDuckWestlinnDuck Member Posts: 15,298 Standard Supporter
    If you asked a person with Blue Cross insurance if he supported medicare for all, but that anyone with private sector insurance would lose their insurance - you would get a different response. That is the leftards medicare proposal.
Sign In or Register to comment.