What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Lets get some citations out of you knucks:

1) It was claimed Seattle was losing jobs as a result of $15 minimum wage. Source please?

2) It was also claimed that raising minimum wage hurts fast food jobs. I find that to be highly unlikely, so source please?
 
Rover said:
Lets get some citations out of you knucks:

1) It was claimed Seattle was losing jobs as a result of $15 minimum wage. Source please?

2) It was also claimed that raising minimum wage hurts fast food jobs. I find that to be highly unlikely, so source please?
Click to expand...

There was a news or video article that a pizza shop had to lay off people and cut hours and remove discounts bcause of the new law. Google pizza Seattle wage and see if it pops up.
 
joecct said:
There was a news or video article that a pizza shop had to lay off people and cut hours and remove discounts bcause of the new law. Google pizza Seattle wage and see if it pops up.
Click to expand...

see my last post. One pizza shop is an anecdote, not data.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I like how a bad economic theory, that raising the minimum wage costs job, is being directly challenged. For too long this was taken as fact. Much like Kansas has been a good expiriment in supply side economics (it failed) lets see how Seattle does with a $15 minimum wage.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

I still don't understand what the article has to do with the 17th. I might have missed something in the article or I'm just not making the connection today.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

dxmnkd316 said:
I still don't understand what the article has to do with the 17th. I might have missed something in the article or I'm just not making the connection today.
Click to expand...

It's not in the article, it's another of the attempts to pry the vote back from the "wrong" people (i.e., non-conservatives). There's a school of thought on the ideological right that direct election of Senators is somehow bad because it's "mob" rule. There's a far more important school of thought on the pragmatic right that it is easier to bribe state legislators to push through the "right" Senators than it is to, you know, actually have elections.

The overall idea is that as more people wake up the Republicans' raison d'être of keeping the top marginal tax rate low is imperiled, therefore they must impede democracy to serve their paymasters.
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Kepler said:
It's not in the article, it's another of the attempts to pry the vote back from the "wrong" people (i.e., non-conservatives). There's a school of thought on the ideological right that direct election of Senators is somehow bad because it's "mob" rule. There's a far more important school of thought on the pragmatic right that it is easier to bribe state legislators to push through the "right" Senators than it is to, you know, actually have elections.

The overall idea is that as more people wake up the Republicans' raison d'être of keeping the top marginal tax rate low is imperiled, therefore they must impede democracy to serve their paymasters.
Click to expand...

The conservative party (at least in this state) has been pushing for a repeal of the 17th for a while, and it doesn't have anything to do with "prying the vote back from the 'wrong' people (i.e., non-conservatives)", although in this state, I could say why you'd think that way. It has to do with the fact that Senators were originally elected as they were in order to ensure that the State Legislatures have a say in the doings of the Federal Government. The people already have representation in Congress, that being the House of Representatives, which is the only house that may originally propose a bill to raise taxes. By the passing of the 17th Amendment, there is no longer state representation in Congress.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Rover said:
I like how a bad economic theory, that raising the minimum wage costs job, is being directly challenged. For too long this was taken as fact. Much like Kansas has been a good expiriment in supply side economics (it failed) lets see how Seattle does with a $15 minimum wage.
Click to expand...

I was gonna ask about this too. The problem with economics is that there's just so much misinformation out there and it seems difficult to find peer reviewed stuff that you can trust because a lot of econ profs have their agendas and what not.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

joecct said:
There was a news or video article that a pizza shop had to lay off people and cut hours and remove discounts bcause of the new law. Google pizza Seattle wage and see if it pops up.
Click to expand...

There are plenty more places that have reported associated cuts, not just one pizza shop. It is the restaurant and live music industries that are hit the hardest.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Kepler said:
It's not in the article, it's another the attempts to pry the vote back from the "wrong" people (i.e., non-conservatives). There's a school a thought on the ideological right that direct election of Senators is somehow bad because it's "mob" rule. There's a far more important school of thought on the pragmatic right that it is easier to bribe state legislators to push through the "right" Senators than it is to, you know, actually have elections.
Click to expand...

Ok, that's ringing a bell. I'm guessing someone here has explained this to me (at least once) before. I think I tend to dismiss it and forget it as lunacy and it'll never happen. For that to be repealed it would take a monumental political effort like we haven't seen in generations.

This is something that the vast, vast, vast majority of people, including Republicans, would see this as a bad idea.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

dxmnkd316 said:
Ok, that's ringing a bell. I'm guessing someone here has explained this to me (at least once) before. I think I tend to dismiss it and forget it as lunacy and it'll never happen. For that to be repealed it would take a monumental political effort like we haven't seen in generations.

This is something that the vast, vast, vast majority of people, including Republicans, would see this as a bad idea.
Click to expand...

It'll never happen, but it's amazing that it's gone from a fringe John Birch Society idea in the 70's to being bandied about by self-described "Constitutional scholarly conservatives" in relatively respected righty think tanks. Trickle down never had the support of more than 10% of even conservative economists, and yet they used it to pull off one of the greatest heists in history. Never underestimate a patently stupid idea that will make powerful people rich -- they can always buy people to call it "credible."
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

Kepler said:
people are, very gradually, waking up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that d*mned goose takes too long to lay those golden eggs one by one, if we slit it open we can just take all the eggs out at once instead. :(

If we are all destitute then we are all equal at last, eh? :(

Why bother to innovate or invent anything at all if you cannot make a profit from selling it....

oh, right, inventors are merely unfortunate "collateral damage." The real predators are all those evil speculators and investment bankers. They make great targets, let's somehow tax all their income while leaving incentives in place to spur technological progress.

How is that coming along? Is there a nice clean way to make sure only bankers and speculators get taxed while innovators and inventors are exempted?
 
Last edited:
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

You know what's better than getting a bunch of meager handouts that are barely enough to live on?

Innovating and becoming a billionaire. Hell, I'd settle for millionaire.
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FreshFish said:
Yeah, that d*mned goose takes too long to lay those golden eggs one by one, if we slit it open we can just take all the eggs out at once instead. :(

If we are all destitute then we are all equal at last, eh? :(

Why bother to innovate or invent anything at all if you cannot make a profit from selling it....

oh, right, inventors are merely unfortunate "collateral damage." The real predators are all those evil speculators and investment bankers. They make great targets, let's somehow tax all their income while leaving incentives in place to spur technological progress.

How is that coming along? Is there a nice clean way to make sure only bankers and speculators get taxed while innovators and inventors are exempted?
Click to expand...
You could've just said "yeah I didn't read the article and will now spew a bunch of talking points I heard on republican talk radio".
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

trixR4kids said:
You could've just said "yeah I didn't read the article and will now spew a bunch of talking points I heard on republican talk radio".
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. People are "warming up" to redistribution because it's not their money being lost, and they're being the ones promised it because their whining about not getting $15/hour to flip burgers didn't help. That being said, I'm not sure where the whole invention thing came from, especially considering inventors are spending probably about double what they spent to invent on "patent protections".
 
Re: Weaving the Strands: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 2.0

FlagDUDE08 said:
You're missing the point. People are "warming up" to redistribution because it's not their money being lost, and they're being the ones promised it because their whining about not getting $15/hour to flip burgers didn't help. That being said, I'm not sure where the whole invention thing came from, especially considering inventors are spending probably about double what they spent to invent on "patent protections".
Click to expand...

If you think that is what is going on then I truly do feel sorry for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top