They think they are helping the workers making $9.50 an hour and what will happen will all of those people will simply make more. The reality is some off them might, but at $15 the labor supply will grow and there will be more competition for those jobs. The pool people will be better educated, better communication skills (I.e. They speak English) and will take the jobs from those that this is meant to help. They are essentially making it against the law for people who are worth $9.50 to have a job.
Also, demand for labor in that sector will decrease, further squeezing them out. I LOLd at the guy holding the sign demanding a $15 wage...it was in Spanish. He was basically asking the council to outlaw his ability to work.
To the degree that any of this affects the economy is related to how close the wage is to equilibrium. In the past I suspect minimum wage was close to equilibrium and the increases in the wage we small so the affect wasn't dramatic. This increase seems much larger is the affects could be more pronounced.
Seattle also has a fairly strong economy that can absorb some of this, but I think the bottom line is a bot of people who think they are getting a raise will get a big fat zero.
Line
Leave Mrs Blitzkrieg out of this.
Pictures of Mrs. Blitzkrieg's big fat zero or get the fuck out.
That whole story is great. For one, the teacher is pretty hot which helps the story. The kid is a dumbass for running his mouth, but the best part of the story is the teacher flipped out on the kid for taking a high school girl to the prom.
I just dont know why they stopped at 15.... Should just go to 50. More money equals a better economy and happier people. Fact.
I've had that conversation. They use a false argument that more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy. It's false because productivity has not changed and they may be taking money that could be used for capital investment. Those are the true drivers of growth. Not consumption. (This is why it's not a zero sum game) And even if it is spent by these people, it has no better benefit than if the owners, executives and managers spent it.
So if you extend their argument out that if $15 is good, why not $50 or $100, they say no one is talking about a wage that high and it's hyperbole. But what they deny or are too dumb to grasp is the same economic models that make $50 ridiculous, apply to $15 and hour. The intuitively know that $50 is too much, but have an arbitrary number in their head they think will work. The question isn't if the wage will be out of equilibrium, but by how much, and how much is acceptable to them? How many people are they willing to hurt in order to help others? That is not compassion, that's using the force of government to coerce people to forward their socialist agenda. It's easy to feign compassion with other peoples money. It makes you look like a fucking hero at cocktail parties and the reception area of the youth symphony ( hi collegedoog).
disagree. that's just more bourgeois mythology fabricated and regurgitated to entrench the status quo for those who control the means of production. fuck, can you just not move on from your econ 202 class? what's it been? 30 years? read another fucking book or drink more of those cocktails you used to ramble on about. you were a lot more fun back then.
and while you're at it, why don't you lay off the blind people and the retards. they've never done a fucking thing to you. i mean, what kind of mother fucker lies in waiting for a seeing eye dog to take a shit on a plane so he can make a federal case out of it? prick.
Where the fuck were these teachers when I was in school?
Ever notice every single time the teacher is attractive too. I don't get it. It's not like she is homely and can't get laid from someone her age or at least some boy toy who is legal age. Why the fuck they feel the need to fuck some 16 year old I never did get it.
Also yes if I was 16 and any of these teachers who constantly get busted for this wanted to have sex with me I would willing do so.
Any Seattle people here ever hear the rumors from about 5 years ago of a Garfield teacher fucking students, and then being let go in a big hush hush. Just what I'm hearing.
Where the fuck were these teachers when I was in school?
Ever notice every single time the teacher is attractive too. I don't get it. It's not like she is homely and can't get laid from someone her age or at least some boy toy who is legal age. Why the fuck they feel the need to fuck some 16 year old I never did get it.
Also yes if I was 16 and any of these teachers who constantly get busted for this wanted to have sex with me I would willing do so.
FYFMFE
Agree - if I had a willing teacher like this, I would take her down to Saltwater State Park and give her the fucking HBI on a nightly basis
Where the fuck were these teachers when I was in school?
Ever notice every single time the teacher is attractive too. I don't get it. It's not like she is homely and can't get laid from someone her age or at least some boy toy who is legal age. Why the fuck they feel the need to fuck some 16 year old I never did get it.
Also yes if I was 16 and any of these teachers who constantly get busted for this wanted to have sex with me I would willing do so.
FYFMFE
Agree - if I had a willing teacher like this, I would take her down to Saltwater State Park and give her the fucking HBI on a nightly basis
Without fail every one of these teachers are always hot. I don't get why they feel the need to fuck teenage boys when they can easily pick up some dude at a bar, at the gym or wherever.
EDIT: Just looked up how that Mary Kay bitch ended up marrying that dude. What a fuck show that is.
Oh and obvious daddy issues too.
In 1982, her father's political career was severely damaged when it was revealed that he had fathered two children out of wedlock during an affair with a former student at Santa Ana College, where he had taught political science.[10] Her father's affair caused her parents to separate, but they later reconciled. According to friends, Mary Kay felt betrayed and thought her mother was a cold person who "drove him to it" by denying her father affection.[11][12]
Letourneau was arrested in Tukwila, Washington, a Seattle suburb in King County, on January 4, 2014 on a failure to appear warrant after being arrested for driving without a license
Maybe, just maybe, they're attracted to their victims and not to some sweatpants wearing, dickless, mommy boys at the strip club. Ever think about that Moar_cuckold? Why don't you take out your nub of a cock and wiggle it around, try to forget your weasily little life.
Maybe, just maybe, they're attracted to their victims and not to some sweatpants wearing, dickless, mommy boys at the strip club. Ever think about that Moar_cukold? Why don't you take out your nub of a cock and wiggle it around, try to forget your weasily little life.
Maybe, just maybe, they're attracted to their victims and not to some sweatpants wearing, dickless, mommy boys at the strip club. Ever think about that Moar_cuckold? Why don't you take out your nub of a cock and wiggle it around, try to forget your weasily little life.
Well considering she married the kid after she got out of prison for 7 years there is more to it. She's obviously fucked up in the head.
Great contribution as always. Friday Sacrifice couldn't come soon enough.
I just dont know why they stopped at 15.... Should just go to 50. More money equals a better economy and happier people. Fact.
I've had that conversation. They use a false argument that more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy. It's false because productivity has not changed and they may be taking money that could be used for capital investment. Those are the true drivers of growth. Not consumption. (This is why it's not a zero sum game) And even if it is spent by these people, it has no better benefit than if the owners, executives and managers spent it.
So if you extend their argument out that if $15 is good, why not $50 or $100, they say no one is talking about a wage that high and it's hyperbole. But what they deny or are too dumb to grasp is the same economic models that make $50 ridiculous, apply to $15 and hour. The intuitively know that $50 is too much, but have an arbitrary number in their head they think will work. The question isn't if the wage will be out of equilibrium, but by how much, and how much is acceptable to them? How many people are they willing to hurt in order to help others? That is not compassion, that's using the force of government to coerce people to forward their socialist agenda. It's easy to feign compassion with other peoples money. It makes you look like a fucking hero at cocktail parties and the reception area of the youth symphony ( hi collegedoog).
disagree. that's just more bourgeois mythology fabricated and regurgitated to entrench the status quo for those who control the means of production. fuck, can you just not move on from your econ 202 class? what's it been? 30 years? read another fucking book or drink more of those cocktails you used to ramble on about. you were a lot more fun back then.
and while you're at it, why don't you lay off the blind people and the retards. they've never done a fucking thing to you. i mean, what kind of mother fucker lies in waiting for a seeing eye dog to take a shit on a plane so he can make a federal case out of it? prick.
I just dont know why they stopped at 15.... Should just go to 50. More money equals a better economy and happier people. Fact.
I've had that conversation. They use a false argument that more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy. It's false because productivity has not changed and they may be taking money that could be used for capital investment. Those are the true drivers of growth. Not consumption. (This is why it's not a zero sum game) And even if it is spent by these people, it has no better benefit than if the owners, executives and managers spent it.
Right. No one is motivated to be more productive by higher wages. The workforce has reached maximum productivity because everyone believes they are being fairly compensated. Smells like horse shit. I thought Derek banned the horse that was defecating on women's heads around here.
One figure has it that average CEO pay is 331 times that of the average worker. Money being put to real productive use right? Lets use that figure as an example. Say there are 331 employees at a company, each making $20,000 a year. The CEO is making $6.62 million (331 x 20,000). $13.24 million is being spent on salaries. Here's some food for thought: How about increasing the employees' salaries to $35,000 each. You now have $11.59 million in employee salary expenditure, with $1.66 million left over for CEO pay (still WAY too fucking high compared to the average worker). You tell me what would be more productive. A single, useless parasite at the very top forging his golden parachute from the fleece of the Argonauts, or 331 workers who just got their salaries nearly doubled? Not only will they be happy to work harder, because they feel they are getting paid closer to what they're worth, but more skilled people will be drawn into the equation (like you said), thereby increasing productivity. I'd wager every one of Citrus Man's 20's in circulation, together with all of Cockus's poasts, that the company that axes CEO pay with a view to more fairly compensating their workers, would outperform the fucked up company in the above example.
The CEO is taking an obscene amount of money that could otherwise be used for capital investment, not the poorly paid workers who make the company go round.
As for the rest of the argument, the "more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy." That is correct. The fat cat faggot who is blowing his money on Rolls Royces and French villas, will still buy the same amount of groceries. The workers (who can now actually afford to buy enough groceries to feed their families) will be weened off of foodstamps (which they have to use because of the shit poor pay they get) and will spend more on food, clothing, gas, everything. The argument is reasonable. Water doesn't get much wetter than that.
I just dont know why they stopped at 15.... Should just go to 50. More money equals a better economy and happier people. Fact.
I've had that conversation. They use a false argument that more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy. It's false because productivity has not changed and they may be taking money that could be used for capital investment. Those are the true drivers of growth. Not consumption. (This is why it's not a zero sum game) And even if it is spent by these people, it has no better benefit than if the owners, executives and managers spent it.
So if you extend their argument out that if $15 is good, why not $50 or $100, they say no one is talking about a wage that high and it's hyperbole. But what they deny or are too dumb to grasp is the same economic models that make $50 ridiculous, apply to $15 and hour. The intuitively know that $50 is too much, but have an arbitrary number in their head they think will work. The question isn't if the wage will be out of equilibrium, but by how much, and how much is acceptable to them? How many people are they willing to hurt in order to help others? That is not compassion, that's using the force of government to coerce people to forward their socialist agenda. It's easy to feign compassion with other peoples money. It makes you look like a fucking hero at cocktail parties and the reception area of the youth symphony ( hi collegedoog).
disagree. that's just more bourgeois mythology fabricated and regurgitated to entrench the status quo for those who control the means of production. fuck, can you just not move on from your econ 202 class? what's it been? 30 years? read another fucking book or drink more of those cocktails you used to ramble on about. you were a lot more fun back then.
and while you're at it, why don't you lay off the blind people and the retards. they've never done a fucking thing to you. i mean, what kind of mother fucker lies in waiting for a seeing eye dog to take a shit on a plane so he can make a federal case out of it? prick.
Why the personal attacks, dude? why not just ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTIONS!
Comments
and while you're at it, why don't you lay off the blind people and the retards. they've never done a fucking thing to you. i mean, what kind of mother fucker lies in waiting for a seeing eye dog to take a shit on a plane so he can make a federal case out of it? prick.
Also yes if I was 16 and any of these teachers who constantly get busted for this wanted to have sex with me I would willing do so.
FYFMFE
EDIT: Just looked up how that Mary Kay bitch ended up marrying that dude. What a fuck show that is.
Oh and obvious daddy issues too.
In 1982, her father's political career was severely damaged when it was revealed that he had fathered two children out of wedlock during an affair with a former student at Santa Ana College, where he had taught political science.[10] Her father's affair caused her parents to separate, but they later reconciled. According to friends, Mary Kay felt betrayed and thought her mother was a cold person who "drove him to it" by denying her father affection.[11][12]
Letourneau was arrested in Tukwila, Washington, a Seattle suburb in King County, on January 4, 2014 on a failure to appear warrant after being arrested for driving without a license
Great contribution as always. Friday Sacrifice couldn't come soon enough.
One figure has it that average CEO pay is 331 times that of the average worker. Money being put to real productive use right? Lets use that figure as an example. Say there are 331 employees at a company, each making $20,000 a year. The CEO is making $6.62 million (331 x 20,000). $13.24 million is being spent on salaries. Here's some food for thought: How about increasing the employees' salaries to $35,000 each. You now have $11.59 million in employee salary expenditure, with $1.66 million left over for CEO pay (still WAY too fucking high compared to the average worker). You tell me what would be more productive. A single, useless parasite at the very top forging his golden parachute from the fleece of the Argonauts, or 331 workers who just got their salaries nearly doubled? Not only will they be happy to work harder, because they feel they are getting paid closer to what they're worth, but more skilled people will be drawn into the equation (like you said), thereby increasing productivity. I'd wager every one of Citrus Man's 20's in circulation, together with all of Cockus's poasts, that the company that axes CEO pay with a view to more fairly compensating their workers, would outperform the fucked up company in the above example.
The CEO is taking an obscene amount of money that could otherwise be used for capital investment, not the poorly paid workers who make the company go round.
As for the rest of the argument, the "more money for people to spend will be multiplied and help the economy." That is correct. The fat cat faggot who is blowing his money on Rolls Royces and French villas, will still buy the same amount of groceries. The workers (who can now actually afford to buy enough groceries to feed their families) will be weened off of foodstamps (which they have to use because of the shit poor pay they get) and will spend more on food, clothing, gas, everything. The argument is reasonable. Water doesn't get much wetter than that.
The problem is, the rocket washers want to be paid what the rocket scientists earn... after taking the job... but with fewer hours.
Back in the day you had to be a man and get your pussy face to face.
And if you were a man and nailed that pussy face to face it was whispered about, not posted on The Social Media.