I'm still confused as to what kris is defining as unskilled labor as he claims a stocker is skilled labor, but it was implied that a fast food worker is unskilled. So what defines unskilled in Kris' world, maybe that will explain why he thinks it is unfairly tilted towards big companies.

1/11/2007 8:55:24 PM

Quote :

"Shouldn't we give up talking about "limited transportation options""

Probably. I just like belaboring the point because Kris seems to like avoiding it.

^ Since Kris defines a skilled job as "If EVERYONE can't do it, then it is SKILLED" and he considers 'can't do it' to include 'unwilling to do it', I imagine that he believes that there are no unskilled workers. Therefore, all workers are skilled and should be paid as skilled labor.

1/11/2007 9:14:03 PM

Quote :

"We're supposed to take your word for it because it's difficult to find statistics?"

I don't care how you take it, I'm just telling you that I wasn't able to find statistics.

Quote :

"Do you still not understand that public transportation is LESS limiting than having NO reliable transportation, which was your original statement/concern?"

My original concern was that their transportion limited them, and it's still true.

Quote :

"Your first mention of a car in this thread was to say that you don't believe that 70% of poverty households own a car."

That's not what I said.

Quote :

"For those without reliable transportation (i.e without a personal vehicle), how does public transportation limit their employment opportunities?"

Not all employers are near a bus route, thus they are limited.

Quote :

"73% own at least one car"

Of poor households, not poor people. You've continued to try to make that statement, but your earlier statistics don't support it.

Quote :

"I'm still confused as to what kris is defining as unskilled labor as he claims a stocker is skilled labor, but it was implied that a fast food worker is unskilled."

Not everyone can work as a stocker, most everyone can work in fast food.

1/11/2007 10:25:24 PM

Quote :

"Of poor households, not poor people. You've continued to try to make that statement, but your earlier statistics don't support it."

So what? 30% of poor households have two or more cars. Cars, bikes, scooters, and motorcycles can be had for very little money. If a household had use of getting a second car then it would do so. But, it seems to me, many poor households would rather share a better car (dropping one working member off at work before proceeding to the next member's work, etc) than get two crappy cars. The poor have to make very difficult decisions everyday; where to work, how to get there, etc. And they are getting there: regional unemployment rates do not vary substantially for very long.

Compare that to Europe where car ownership is less common, and we see that regional unemployment is often very extreme (of course, labor regulations help to make this worse).

1/11/2007 11:12:23 PM

Quote :

"So what? 30% of poor households have two or more cars."

And how many working people are in that household? It's kind of useless to use households.

Quote :

"If a household had use of getting a second car then it would do so."

It's not like they require a lot of money, or good credit, or monthly insurance payments, or a license.

Quote :

"And they are getting there: regional unemployment rates do not vary substantially for very long."

But are they getting what their wage is worth? One can see by illegal immigration that employment isn't hard to find, but employment for the right wage can be.

Quote :

"Compare that to Europe where car ownership is less common, and we see that regional unemployment is often very extreme"

You're ignoring a whole lot of stuff there. It's much easier to get around europe without a car than it is in the US.

1/12/2007 2:28:04 AM

Quote :

"My original concern was that their transportion limited them, and it's still true."

It astounds me that you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that riding the bus is better than not having a car.

1/12/2007 7:50:37 AM

Quote :

"Not everyone can work as a stocker, most everyone can work in fast food."

Most everyone, but not everyone. And I know some fully functional people that could be stockers that would absolutely suck at a fast food job. So fast food by your definitions so far must be skilled labor. Again, what do you define as unskilled labor?

Quote :

"And how many working people are in that household? It's kind of useless to use households. "

A better question would be, how many households that have two or more cars have more than two workers in that household?

Quote :

"But are they getting what their wage is worth? One can see by illegal immigration that employment isn't hard to find, but employment for the right wage can be. "

What are they worth except what the buyers are willing to pay for them and what the sellers are willing to give.

1/12/2007 8:24:12 AM

Quote :

"You're ignoring a whole lot of stuff there. It's much easier to get around europe without a car than it is in the US."

Who says? Does the Paris subway extend out beyond the suburbs or something? Or is it just that their bus network is more extensive? I don't think so. Yes, Americans are more likely to need a car since more of us live in towns without any public transportation. But we are also more likely to be able to have a car: more likely to have an affordable place to park it and more likely to be able to afford it thanks to a deeper used-car market.

But it is obvious that Europe could desperately use wider car ownership, if only to deal with the extreme unemployment differentials found between regions on the continent. Wages are fixed by labor regulations, so employers have no incentive to move where the workers are, as is common in America. So the only option is for European workers to travel to jobs, which they evidently are not doing according to the statistics.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B2GGGL_enUS176&q=Regional+Unemployment+Europe

Quote :

"It's not like they require a lot of money, or good credit, or monthly insurance payments, or a license."

Even if we assume only a car will do, motorcycles and scooters are just too girly for poor people, is a license hard to get? Is $500 (what my friend paid for his truck) a lot of money? Does anyone have use of good credit when buying a jalopy?

You do have a point about insurance payments. When polled, America's poor report their biggest concern is the high cost of auto insurance. This is also why over half reported they were driving without insurance. Not sure where I read that, I think it was out of Freakonomics or something. Either way, google found this:
http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/0909mar.pdf

1/12/2007 11:53:04 AM

Quote :

"It astounds me that you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that riding the bus is better than not having a car."

I never said that, I'm merely stating that riding a bus is more limiting than having a car, and some reason you want to argue with me about this.

Quote :

"Most everyone, but not everyone. And I know some fully functional people that could be stockers that would absolutely suck at a fast food job."

There is somewhere they could be put that they would do just fine. Aynoe that is a stocker could be a fast food worker. Not everyone that is a fast food worker could be a stocker.

Quote :

"A better question would be, how many households that have two or more cars have more than two workers in that household?"

No, that's completely irrelevant to what we're talking about.

Quote :

"What are they worth except what the buyers are willing to pay for them and what the sellers are willing to give."

Unfortunately this doesn't always result in the optimium price, it's a bit more complicated than that.

Quote :

"Who says?"

Their entire lifestyle has been built around not having a car, while ours has been built aroung having a car.

Quote :

"So the only option is for European workers to travel to jobs, which they evidently are not doing according to the statistics."

That's a hell of a jump. You can't determine that from those statistics.

Quote :

"is a license hard to get?"

No, but it's hard to have. Say you get caught driving without insurance, or under the influence, or any number of other things.

Quote :

"Is $500 (what my friend paid for his truck) a lot of money? Does anyone have use of good credit when buying a jalopy?"

You'll not I originally said reliable. Having a car doesn't really help if it doesn't go anywhere.

1/12/2007 12:38:52 PM

Quote :

"I never said that, I'm merely stating that riding a bus is more limiting than having a car, and some reason you want to argue with me about this."

Please take a reading comprehension class and re-read what you've posted.

1/12/2007 2:35:00 PM

Quote :

"But it is obvious that Europe could desperately use wider car ownership, if only to deal with the extreme unemployment differentials found between regions on the continent. Wages are fixed by labor regulations, so employers have no incentive to move where the workers are, as is common in America. So the only option is for European workers to travel to jobs, which they evidently are not doing according to the statistics."

In the parts I've spent a lot of time in, public transit is cheap, fast, and runs pretty often. This is true in the British Isles, West Germany, Denmark, Holland, etc. These are the most heavily populated areas. Now, this could be true in a place like East Germany, where mid-sized and small businesses are having trouble still finding a foothold in the post-Eastern Bloc world. The command economy continues to cause problems as the void it has created by eliminating so much of private enterprize, and the post-cold war readjustments, continue to cause problems.

1/12/2007 2:39:15 PM

Quote :

"Please take a reading comprehension class and re-read what you've posted."

Then please show me where I said that a bus was more limiting than no transportation at all, or was that just a strawman?

1/12/2007 4:08:15 PM

Quote :

"Then please show me where I said that a bus was more limiting than no transportation at all, or was that just a strawman?"

It's not that you've denied that it's true (explicitly) so much as you've refused to acknowledge that it is true. Here's our conversation, step-by-step:

Quote :

"Kris: People without relibale transportation don't have a lot of options with employers, even still, most large employers of minimium wage are large retail chains."

Those without cars don't have a lot of options with respect to finding employers.

Quote :

"LoneSnark: Which is obviously not the case when there are tens of thousands of competitors within a bus ride of each other."

But they can take the bus.

Quote :

"Kris: This wouldn't be the case in a large city, much less anywhere else."

No they can't (i.e. busses don't help move large amounts of workers to employers).

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: That's funny, because one of the major complaints about public transportation is that it only serves commercial destinations. [...] You said that one of the reasons that the unskilled labor market isn't all that competitive and is 'riddled with buyer market power' is because unskilled workers don't have the reliable transportation necessary to access a wide range of employers. Yet public transportation serves predominately commercial locations, i.e. it provides reliable transportation to a wide range of potential employers."

These busses go where those without many skills need to go to find employment.

Quote :

"Kris: So it does, for those few workers lucky enough to live and work near a bus route. [...] It can serve a thousands and still only be a few relative to the entire US unskilled workforce."

Yeah, but nobody is really helped by the bus (in any significant numbers).

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Ah, that must be the result of the fact that busses only serve the nicest neighborhoods."

It seems pretty silly that buses don't help unskilled workers.

Quote :

"Kris: You still don't understand."

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Don't understand what? That public transportation is available in many places that can transport those without private transportation to a job? Or that public transportation is incapable of transporting everyone to the job of their choice?"

Huh? Busses aren't helpful to those without cars?

Quote :

"Kris: Buses only provide transportation for specific people to specific places."

[Apparently this where you start talking about cars, even though you haven't used the word car yet.]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Busses provide transportation to anyone who gets on the bus. Obviously, busses have routes that must be followed. However, in a conversation concerning methods for those without cars to reach available jobs, you cannot dismiss public transportation as an option (which you seem to be doing) just because it doesn't provide transportation for all people to all locations. Especially given the fact that the many public transit systems are specifically geared towards lower income individuals, servicing where they live, work, and shop. It's not a coincidence that there's a bus stop in the Food Lion parking lot on Avent Ferry."

Yeah, but the bus is still better than nothing.

Quote :

"Kris: The point is that this is irrelevant to our market power debate, if anything it helps my case by further limiting the few large chains that these people can sell their labor."

No, the bus is more limiting than nothing. [Notice you've yet to introduce a car into your argument.]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: At first it was people without reliable transportation don't have access to a significant number of potential employers. Now, reliable public transit which serves a large number of potential workplaces is somehow "further limiting" the choice of potential employers. Have you ever ridden a bus, other than to school? As a local example, the CAT bus has routes all up and down Capital Blvd, providing access to literally hundreds, if not thousands, of businesses ranging from mom-and-pop to large retail and from commercial to light industry. Please explain to me again how public transportation limits the number of potential employers that a worker has access to."

How in the world is a bus more limiting than no transportation?

Quote :

"Kris: I've already explained it, stop trying to make this debate circular."

Sigh. I've already explained this. [You still have not used the word 'car' at this point. Not being a mind reader, I think you're still talking about not having a car (i.e. no reliable transportation).]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Then try again. You have yet to explain how providing transportation limits the number of potential employers a person has access to."

Try again, please.

Quote :

"Kris: My apologize, I assumed you knew the difference between a bus and a car."

[THIS IS YOUR FIRST MENTION OF A CAR]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Oh, so now we're comparing busses and cars? I thought minimum wage earners didn't have cars! [...] I didn't realize that "people without relibale transportation" means "people with cars.""

When did cars enter the conversation? Are you saying that no reliable transportation means having a car?

Quote :

"Kris: You've missed the point, so just think about it, what is the major difference between a bus and a car? Think about it in terms of where you can go, which is more restrictive?"

[THIS IS YOUR SECOND MENTION OF A CAR]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: This whole bus thing originated with you stating that "[p]eople without relibale transportation don't have a lot of options with employers." Which isn't untrue, but after it was pointed out that public transportation is available to a large group of people and provides reliable transportation to a large number of employment opportunities, you've repeatedly balked and refused to acknowledge the usefulness of public transportation. Now you claim to have been talking about cars, even though the only time cars have entered the conversation was when LoneSnark mentioned them (and you subsequently refused to believe that 70-something percent of poverty households own a vehicle)."

When did you start talking about cars?

Quote :

"Kris: Do you still not understand that using public transportation LIMITS the places that you can go? [...] I brought up cars to try to help you understand why people without access to reliable transportation don't have a whole lot of options. I was trying to show you how cars offer more options than busses. This is a simple thing, how can you still not understand it?"

Busses are limiting compared to cars.

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: I understand that perfectly. Do you still not understand that public transportation is LESS limiting than having NO reliable transportation, which was your original statement/concern? [...] Having a car is not (generally) considered to be a lack of reliable transportation, which was what your original statement concerned--those without reliable transportation (i.e. without a personal vehicle) are limited in their employment opportunities. For those without reliable transportation (i.e without a personal vehicle), how does public transportation limit their employment opportunities?"

I understand that busses are more limiting than cars, but the conversation was about how busses are less limiting than nothing.

Quote :

"LoneSnark: Shouldn't we give up talking about "limited transportation options" since we have already demonstrated that transportation is readily available for those in poverty?"

STFU

Quote :

"Kris: My original concern was that their transportion limited them, and it's still true."

[What does 'their transportation mean'?]

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: It astounds me that you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge that riding the bus is better than not having a car."

WTF?

Quote :

"Kris: I never said that, I'm merely stating that riding a bus is more limiting than having a car, and some reason you want to argue with me about this. [...] You'll not I originally said reliable. Having a car doesn't really help if it doesn't go anywhere."

But I've always been talking about busses and cars, not busses and nothing. Everybody knows that poor people don't have working cars.

Quote :

"A Tanzarian: Please take a reading comprehension class and re-read what you've posted."

WTF?

[Edited on January 12, 2007 at 5:22 PM. Reason : ]

1/12/2007 5:17:41 PM

Quote :

"It's not that you've denied that it's true (explicitly) so much as you've refused to acknowledge that it is true. Here's our conversation, step-by-step:"

This should really not be nearly as difficult as you're making it.

People without cars have limited options on the employers they can work for. It's that simple.

1/12/2007 8:33:58 PM

Quote :

"This should really not be nearly as difficult as you're making it. People without cars have limited can expand their options on the employers they can work for by using the bus. It's that simple."

Next time you're in a thread, try to remember what you've said.

[Edited on January 12, 2007 at 8:37 PM. Reason : ]

1/12/2007 8:37:11 PM

I know what I've said, and it's still true, people without cars have limited employment options.

You'll admit that, right?

1/13/2007 1:31:05 AM

And like I've said: that list people is very short. Especially since a lot of poor people live in cities where car ownership is low even among the well-off. Many New Yorkers just refuse to get a car.

Or are you still sticking to a theory that two or more people cannot get to work with only one car?

1/13/2007 2:49:08 AM

Quote :

"And like I've said: that list people is very short."

We don't know that.

Quote :

"Especially since a lot of poor people live in cities where car ownership is low even among the well-off."

That makes their options no less limited. Would you be able to travel further without a car as the price of a car goes up?

1/13/2007 10:34:56 PM

Quote :

"We don't know that."

Sure, in the sense that we don't know there is no life on Mars. But the evidence is very strong that the overwhelming majority of those living in Poverty are not suffering from insurmountable transportation difficulty.

1/14/2007 1:05:33 AM

Quote :

"But the evidence is very strong that the overwhelming majority of those living in Poverty are not suffering from insurmountable transportation difficulty."

You've show that many households have their own cars, but that's a far stretch from most working poor people, and even further from most of them having reliable transportation.

1/14/2007 1:24:37 AM

No, I showed plenty of evidence:
First, that over 70% of households classified as living in poverty report owning a working automobile. 30% report owning two or more.
Second, a single car can be used by several workers in one or more households to arrive at even far away locations of employment. This is called car-pooling and is not beyond the ability of the poor to organize.
Third, non-automotive transportation is even cheaper and even more available. That the poor have obviously chosen to own automobiles dispite the cost and hassle compared to equally effective and competing modes of transportation demonstrates the abundance of resources available to this arbitrarily defined group of individuals.

To argue that transportation is an insurmountable hinderance to the poor you would need to contradict all three points. So far, you have presented no evidence to contradict either.

1/14/2007 1:52:45 AM

LoneSnark

If I took your license and prevented you from driving and you worked anywhere outside of the mall, downtown, or RTP, you'd hate your life.

So seriously, stop making shit up. I swear to God every time I accidentally wander into a economics thread you say something that is so extremely short sighted and stupid that I'm compelled to respond.

1/14/2007 2:01:32 AM

SandSanta, WTF? Are you really that short-sighted? I can only assume you took my license because I was stupid and ran over a nun. That alone would make me hate my life. But curse of curses, I'd have to ask my wife to drive me to work... Poor me, I have to spend more time with the family.

Or, curse of curses, find someone else that works there and ride my bike to their house in the morning so I can ride with them. Or, if they are too god damned nice, they might pick me up before going to work! Dear God no! I'd have to spend more time with friends! We'll need to split the cost of gas!

1/14/2007 9:30:24 AM

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/CED/snapshot/autoownership.html
Correlation is not causation, but I find it interesting that more poor people means more people with no cars.

http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/5000/5100/5141/LowInc.pdf

Quote :

"About a quarter (26%) of low income households do not have a car, compared to 4% of other households "

Quote :

"When these households have a car, the car is quite old. The average car is 10 years old in low income households, compared to 7.3 years for other households. However, in low income households, there is on average, only .7 vehicles per adult, compared to over 1 vehicle per adult in other households"

The same study shows that amongst low income single parent households the number jumps from 26% to 36%

The same study says that low income people are much more likely to car pool, and those that have cars are much more likely to give rides to friends and neighbors. However, it also says that those without cars are much more likely to walk to work. This makes sense when you think about it. If your only option to getting to work is a car pool what happens when your friend's car breaks down? or if his work schedule changes?

Your third "point" is embarrasing. "even more available" is a claim that is just plain false. And, "abundance of resources available to this arbitrarily defined group of individuals" is just pathetic. The group is not arbitrarily defined, and if what they have is "an abundance" then why dont you just throw away everything you have and move to harlem?

1/14/2007 11:33:32 AM

What happens to you when your car breaks down?

1/14/2007 11:42:14 AM

I become incredibly happy that im able to borrow my mom's.

http://www.lib.ncsu.edu:3046/cgi/content/abstract/22/1/50
Article was being annoying so I cant just copy and paste. But, it says that most bus routes dont serve suburban neighborhoods and if they do they dont serve them at night or on weekends. That matters when you have statistics such as "two-thirds of the Boston region's job growth has been in the suburbs" After that consider that 40% of entry level jobs in the suburbs are not on bus routes at all.

Interesting notes from the study. They found that going from not having a car to having a car increased a persons likelihood of finding a job 13 fold. They also said that having the ability to walk to transit increased a persons likelihood of finding a job, but not as much because of the difficulty in finding jobs that were accessible to the transit.

1/14/2007 11:52:56 AM

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 12:01 PM. Reason : wait for it]

^^^ Ok, so, what is your point? None of your statistics contradict mine, 26% without a car means 74% with a car. And what percentage of that 26% live in cities with mass transit available to the job they want? What percentage live within walking distance of employment? What percentage are able to use the cars of friends and family?

And so what if the cars are old? Even if I become filthy rich I'm still going to drive a used car. My current car is 13 years old, still manages 90 on the highway.

Look, perhaps we are crossing points here. My point is simply that sentient human beings are capable of doing something as simple as reaching a job in the morning. It strikes me that this task pales in comparison to the herculean task of Finding a job in the first place. I'm not arguing the task is simple, I'm damn sure not arguing you can do it by yourself. But this is what friends and family are for.

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 12:10 PM. Reason : abusing my priveledges]

1/14/2007 11:59:25 AM

actually, i have spent large chunks of time without a car.

and, while 26% may not seem incredibly high to you, when you compare that to 4% amongst everyone else its a pretty significant difference. Isnt most of your belief founded upon people helping themselves and getting jobs to further themselves? If they cant get to the job then I would say its a pretty big detriment to them helping themselves out of poverty.

[Edited on January 14, 2007 at 12:03 PM. Reason : ps- way to delete.]

1/14/2007 12:03:08 PM

Quote :

"They found that going from not having a car to having a car increased a persons likelihood of finding a job 13 fold"

Nice little tidbit. I find that perfectly plausable. Of course, how was that statistic calculated? Did they find 1000 unemployed carless people and give them cars? Either way, it explains why so many poor people have made the effort to get an automobile that they and theirs can use, 74% succeeded. But like I said, would not the statistic still hold for an individual with a motorcycle or scooter? Why did 74% of this nations poor, those with the least disposable income, opt for a car when a motorcycle is cheaper?

Perhaps if I ask a different question: What effect does being unemployed have upon your status as a car owner? I forgot the statistics, but a large percentage of those living in poverty are there because of unemployment. And with prolonged unemployment you reach a stage of canibalising your own resources by selling your property, moving in with friends, selling your car.

In-so-far as a higher minimum wage increases unemployment it would also increase carlessness.

1/14/2007 12:15:32 PM

so...it wont at all.

1/14/2007 12:24:07 PM

perhaps you could elaborate? What wont at all?

If you mean to say that a higher minimum wage will not increase unemployment then see my posts on page 1.

1/14/2007 12:27:16 PM

no. thats ok. ive seen the words you throw out here about economics on about 50 other threads.

1/14/2007 3:28:02 PM

Quote :

"SandSanta, WTF? Are you really that short-sighted? I can only assume you took my license because I was stupid and ran over a nun. That alone would make me hate my life. But curse of curses, I'd have to ask my wife to drive me to work... Poor me, I have to spend more time with the family. Or, curse of curses, find someone else that works there and ride my bike to their house in the morning so I can ride with them. Or, if they are too god damned nice, they might pick me up before going to work! Dear God no! I'd have to spend more time with friends! We'll need to split the cost of gas! "

Right, and I'm sure if all the working poor had access to those kind of resources then you might have something approaching a point. Since, however, that is not the case, you're pretty much talking like a fool.

1/14/2007 3:32:23 PM

Quote :

"First, that over 70% of households classified as living in poverty report owning a working automobile. 30% report owning two or more. Second, a single car can be used by several workers in one or more households to arrive at even far away locations of employment. This is called car-pooling and is not beyond the ability of the poor to organize. Third, non-automotive transportation is even cheaper and even more available. That the poor have obviously chosen to own automobiles dispite the cost and hassle compared to equally effective and competing modes of transportation demonstrates the abundance of resources available to this arbitrarily defined group of individuals."

^i think "all" working poor have access to at least one of these things

1/14/2007 3:40:57 PM

Quote :

"no. thats ok. ive seen the words you throw out here about economics on about 50 other threads."

It's nice to have an audience, just too bad they view microeconomic analysis as a delusion suffered by economists.

Quote :

"Right, and I'm sure if all the working poor had access to those kind of resources then you might have something approaching a point."

Well, if you are a working poor with none of the resources I'm talking about then you have bigger problems in your life than not getting to work.

1/14/2007 5:47:38 PM

was it this thread that mentioned the nobel winning economists who demanded a raise in the minimum wage?

1/14/2007 8:55:07 PM

Yeah! My wage stays the same! I just moved down a working class!

1/15/2007 7:47:46 AM

Was it not also this thread that mentioned another nobel winning economist explain the reason he demanded a raise in the minimum wage was because unemployment was too low and making social problems such as illegal immigration worse?

1/15/2007 10:16:29 AM

I didnt realize illegal immigration had anything to do with the minimum wage.
If I was gonna break the law and hire an illegal immigrant why would I pay them minimum wage?

1/15/2007 10:29:06 AM

^ Because it is not illegal to hire illegal contract workers. It is incumbent upon the employer to guarantee the legality of their employ, and in such cases the legally liable "employer" is a non-existant company operating out of a mailboxes etc.

Of course, this assumes the employees are verifiably illegal. If the worker has managed to get a fake name and SS number then their employer has done all the checking he is legally liable for and the illegal immigrant is solely responsible for his false statements. This is how the IRS used to find hundreds of people working under the same SS Number.

However, a company employing anyone, legal or otherwise, below the minimum wage can face prison.

This is why you find Economics so difficult to fathom. It is often very complex and convoluted with many unforseen consequences to any eventuality.

1/15/2007 11:27:24 PM

That isn't economics.

1/15/2007 11:28:11 PM

There are positives on both ends, but I strongly advocate not increasing the minimum wage for two reasons.

1. Kills small businesses. Sure, the sales will be picked up by the chain stores, but we lose the little guys in the process and create inflation.

2. Hurts lower middle incom people. I'm sorry, but anyone who actually tries can make more than minimum wage. Raising the minimum will only hurt those near the bottom who try and slowly move up. They move up in wages, only to have the bottom jump back up at them. In the end, someone HAS to be at the bottom. Since things shift, raising the minimum will help the bottom for a few years but really leave them with no net change in lifestyle. You are the bottom, tough shit.

[Edited on January 17, 2007 at 8:04 PM. Reason : /]

1/17/2007 8:04:19 PM