This is a serious post. What can Agip or any other liberal here tout for how well the Biden adminstration is doing for the last year and a half? What can you say about it being any thing other than than the worst clusterf*ck in American history?
nothing is ever perfect, but:
ultra-low3.6% unemployment
ultra-high nearly 6% real GDP growth
incomes rising fast
deficit falling fast
government revenues soaring
consumer spending rising fast
business investment rising fast
corporate profits at record high
Ok? We good Salster?
And to sally's mind, this is a) bad and b) worse than the great depression.
Come on man. These are the good times.
Most of that is true, but as of today, your GDP comment is no longer current, and that's not good.
Filled my Subaru Outback up today - $74 bucks (used to cost ~$35) then went and bought two cases of water and it was $18 bucks.
Thanks Biden!
Only fools believe Presidents control gas prices. We've got one down quarter. If we have another one so that a recession is declared, you might get some dramatically lower gas prices.
Biden doesn't control gas prices, but he SHOULD do something about it other than blaming Putin. But like everything else, he won't fix it and just blame someone else.
Yeah, fun fact: if you compare Gini index by state to the state minimum wage, not only does a higher minimum wage not have a significant positive effect on improving the Gini index, there is actually a slightly negative correlation (re: higher minimum wages led to greater wealth inequality). However, the results were mixed enough that it's more accurate to say that increased minimum wage doesn't improve the wealth inequality situation, rather than say it actively makes it worse.
Quite possible that you are confusing cause and effect.
Quite possible that you are confusing cause and effect.
How do you figure that?
Note that I am only saying it is a possibility. I did not look sufficiently in depth to conclude that cause and effect are being confused - only to open up the possibility.
It is a bit like looking at areas with rent control and noting that they are all areas with high rent. With that, one can come to the simple conclusion that rent control causes rents to soar. The reality might be that previously existing high rents provided the broad based support required to push rent controls through the political process.
In this case, does high income inequality in some ares provide the broad based support required to push through higher minimum wages? And, if so, does this substantially negate the first order conclusion that higher minimum wages cause higher income inequality (or at least, don't help)?
Note that I am only saying it is a possibility. I did not look sufficiently in depth to conclude that cause and effect are being confused - only to open up the possibility.
It is a bit like looking at areas with rent control and noting that they are all areas with high rent. With that, one can come to the simple conclusion that rent control causes rents to soar. The reality might be that previously existing high rents provided the broad based support required to push rent controls through the political process.
In this case, does high income inequality in some ares provide the broad based support required to push through higher minimum wages? And, if so, does this substantially negate the first order conclusion that higher minimum wages cause higher income inequality (or at least, don't help)?
Ah, I see what you mean now. But no, that's not what's happening.
This is the source I used for the Gini index by state: (using the 2012-2016 ACS)
Chris Kolmar is a co-founder of Zippia and the editor-in-chief of the Zippia career advice blog. He has hired over 50 people in his career, been hired five times, and wants to help you land your next job. His research has bee...
I compared that to the 2014 minimum wage rates by state: https://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/state-minimum-wage/ (it would be more accurate to look at the average from 2012-2016, but I figured there wouldn't be a notable difference and this was cheaper - you can double check if you want).
The summary:
14 states had minimum wages of $8.00+, with an average Gini index of 47.09 36 states had minimum wages between $7.25-7.99, with an average Gini index of 45.91
28 states had the federal minimum wage of $7.25 and averaged 45.76 on the Gini index 22 states had a minimum wage of more than $7.25 and averaged 46.85 on the Gini index
and the correlation factor was 0.2485, meaning that there was a slight relationship with higher minimum wage and higher Gini index.
For those that don't know, lower Gini index = more equality
and, specific to your concern: of the 20 states (40% of the nation) that had the greatest growth in the Gini index (re: became worse over time), only 7 still had the federal minimum wage in 2014 (so, only 25% of those states). Of the other 13: 4 were at the federal minimum in 2010 but later raised it within this time frame, and 9 were above the federal minimum throughout the time frame.
Note that I am only saying it is a possibility. I did not look sufficiently in depth to conclude that cause and effect are being confused - only to open up the possibility.
It is a bit like looking at areas with rent control and noting that they are all areas with high rent. With that, one can come to the simple conclusion that rent control causes rents to soar. The reality might be that previously existing high rents provided the broad based support required to push rent controls through the political process.
In this case, does high income inequality in some ares provide the broad based support required to push through higher minimum wages? And, if so, does this substantially negate the first order conclusion that higher minimum wages cause higher income inequality (or at least, don't help)?
Ah, I see what you mean now. But no, that's not what's happening.
This is the source I used for the Gini index by state: (using the 2012-2016 ACS)
I compared that to the 2014 minimum wage rates by state: https://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/state-minimum-wage/ (it would be more accurate to look at the average from 2012-2016, but I figured there wouldn't be a notable difference and this was cheaper - you can double check if you want).
The summary:
14 states had minimum wages of $8.00+, with an average Gini index of 47.09 36 states had minimum wages between $7.25-7.99, with an average Gini index of 45.91
28 states had the federal minimum wage of $7.25 and averaged 45.76 on the Gini index 22 states had a minimum wage of more than $7.25 and averaged 46.85 on the Gini index
and the correlation factor was 0.2485, meaning that there was a slight relationship with higher minimum wage and higher Gini index.
For those that don't know, lower Gini index = more equality
and, specific to your concern: of the 20 states (40% of the nation) that had the greatest growth in the Gini index (re: became worse over time), only 7 still had the federal minimum wage in 2014 (so, only 25% of those states). Of the other 13: 4 were at the federal minimum in 2010 but later raised it within this time frame, and 9 were above the federal minimum throughout the time frame.
so few workers get paid minimum wage that it makes almost no sense to talk about it in terms of moving the needle. Esp because many of them are kids living at home so their incomes are just supplementary. Not worth anyone's time to put much work into it.
I compared that to the 2014 minimum wage rates by state: https://money.cnn.com/interactive/pf/state-minimum-wage/ (it would be more accurate to look at the average from 2012-2016, but I figured there wouldn't be a notable difference and this was cheaper - you can double check if you want).
The summary:
14 states had minimum wages of $8.00+, with an average Gini index of 47.09 36 states had minimum wages between $7.25-7.99, with an average Gini index of 45.91
28 states had the federal minimum wage of $7.25 and averaged 45.76 on the Gini index 22 states had a minimum wage of more than $7.25 and averaged 46.85 on the Gini index
and the correlation factor was 0.2485, meaning that there was a slight relationship with higher minimum wage and higher Gini index.
For those that don't know, lower Gini index = more equality
and, specific to your concern: of the 20 states (40% of the nation) that had the greatest growth in the Gini index (re: became worse over time), only 7 still had the federal minimum wage in 2014 (so, only 25% of those states). Of the other 13: 4 were at the federal minimum in 2010 but later raised it within this time frame, and 9 were above the federal minimum throughout the time frame.
so few workers get paid minimum wage that it makes almost no sense to talk about it in terms of moving the needle. Esp because many of them are kids living at home so their incomes are just supplementary. Not worth anyone's time to put much work into it.
Wait, so your argument is we shouldn't care about the minimum wage at all? Are you sure you're not a conservative?
so few workers get paid minimum wage that it makes almost no sense to talk about it in terms of moving the needle. Esp because many of them are kids living at home so their incomes are just supplementary. Not worth anyone's time to put much work into it.
Wait, so your argument is we shouldn't care about the minimum wage at all? Are you sure you're not a conservative?
I think it needs to be indexed to inflation, and I think it is a good thing on the margin, but it's de minimis in affecting economy-wide statistics. basically, it is a way for government to be a balancing force against business. Which is a key job of government.
Wait, so your argument is we shouldn't care about the minimum wage at all? Are you sure you're not a conservative?
I think it needs to be indexed to inflation, and I think it is a good thing on the margin, but it's de minimis in affecting economy-wide statistics. basically, it is a way for government to be a balancing force against business. Which is a key job of government.
Yeah, I can mostly agree with that. That's part of why in my initial post on this topic I felt the need to point out that there are mixed results, and clarify that it's more accurate to say that minimum wage merely doesn't improve the inequality situation rather than increasing minimum wage has a negative effect on inequality (in other words, while there might be a slight relationship, it isn't worth caring about one way or another).
That's just not the normal leftist talking point when it comes to minimum wage. Usually, it's brought up as a big deal because "people earning minimum wage aren't earning living wages and increasing the minimum wage would change all of that!" but in actuality that doesn't really do much in that regard because, like you said, the vast majority of people earning minimum wage are younger and working entry level jobs - it's either a way to save up money and pay for present/upcoming college expenses or a temporary stepping stone to a "real" job (and because by forcing businesses to pay more money for these lower level jobs, business have to respond by either cutting hours of these lower level jobs or not hire as many new people for these lower level jobs or increase prices to afford the same amount of workers on these lower level jobs).
Only fools believe Presidents control gas prices. We've got one down quarter. If we have another one so that a recession is declared, you might get some dramatically lower gas prices.
Biden doesn't control gas prices, but he SHOULD do something about it other than blaming Putin. But like everything else, he won't fix it and just blame someone else.
Democrats are trash.
What a stupid position. You say Biden doesn't control gas prices, but you want him to do something about it. What to you suggest he should do? Wish really hard?
He has already excoriated the oil companies over the gas prices.
He has already released some of the strategic oil reserves. He has no power to do anything else. And no, nothing regarding drilling or the pipeline extension have anything to do with the current gas prices. Oil companies have more than enough drilling permits...they will drill if they think it is economically favorable to them to do so.
Biden doesn't control gas prices, but he SHOULD do something about it other than blaming Putin. But like everything else, he won't fix it and just blame someone else.
Democrats are trash.
What a stupid position. You say Biden doesn't control gas prices, but you want him to do something about it. What to you suggest he should do? Wish really hard?
He has already excoriated the oil companies over the gas prices.
He has already released some of the strategic oil reserves. He has no power to do anything else. And no, nothing regarding drilling or the pipeline extension have anything to do with the current gas prices. Oil companies have more than enough drilling permits...they will drill if they think it is economically favorable to them to do so.
He should literally do ANYTHING to help...but he'll just send more money overseas. Boomers like you DESTROYED the country because you voted this idiot in because you couldn't handle mean tweets.
