Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Machismo]

I won't. By ensuring such businesses don't exist.

How very fascist of you.

If people thought like you, then they would go out of business. Since they haven't it would appear you are in a small minority.

- - - Updated - - -

Yup. I did. What do you want to doxx myself to prove your fantasy wrong? lmfao

Nope, no need... I simply looked up their locations, then cross referenced with the locations of other shopping.

Awkward for you.

Oh, and I'm not going to simply take you at your word.

- - - Updated - - -

We did. Not our fault you don't read other people's posts.

I read it just fine, and the WaPo article even said they saw decline in jobs of up to 2%.

[Elegiac]

How very fascist of you.

That's not what fascism is, sweaty.

If people thought like you, then they would go out of business. Since they haven't it would appear you are in a small minority.

Exploitation being the default in a system that rewards exploitative practices makes it correct, somehow. /s

[Machismo]

That's not what fascism is, sweaty.



Exploitation being the default makes it correct, somehow.

You think it's exploitation, and the vast majority of consumers and workers seem to disagree.

[PosPosPos]

So in a matter of minutes you checked the radius of all 10 stores listed and found grocery stores within 50 miles. lets not mention the fact those are across the whole state. not to mention some stores are over 200 miles apart.


Yeah bullshit.

Hmm, what a striking sense of deja vu....

He went on and on like a broken recorder over 50 pages saying the equivalent of "I didn't have a lack of nearby competing choices growing up, so neither should anyone" ad nauseam.

[Elegiac]

I read it just fine, and the WaPo article even said they saw decline in jobs of up to 2%.

Not our fault read you can't read a WaPo article, either. *gestures*

And yet you still can't read that it wasn't 2%, it was "maybe 0.5%". And perhaps those "maybe 0.5%" were working two jobs before but now only need to work one, so hurray for them!

You're holding on to a whole lotta nothing here.

- - - Updated - - -

You think it's exploitation, and the vast majority of consumers and workers seem to disagree.

And we're just down to outright logical fallacies now. Okay then.

[Machismo]

Not our fault read you can't read a WaPo article, either. *gestures*



- - - Updated - - -



And we're just down to outright logical fallacies now. Okay then.

"I found that for the typical study in the middle of the range of demonstrated effects, when average pay of affected workers rises by 10 percent after a mandated wage increase, their employment falls by at most 2 percent."

Whoops.

If this is exploitation, either all those consumers support exploitation, or they don't believe it to be exploitation.

Either way, those consumers (and workers) disagree with you.

[Elegiac]

If this is exploitation, either all those consumers support exploitation

Yeah, I'd actually say that's a pretty fair assessment of where our culture is at.

[Machismo]

Hmm, what a striking sense of deja vu....

He went on and on like a broken recorder over 50 pages saying the equivalent of "I didn't have a lack of nearby competing choices growing up, so neither should anyone" ad nauseam.

You may want to read what I typed.

This is awkward for you.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, I'd actually say that's a pretty fair assessment of where our culture is at.

Well, then there's no wonder the $15 minimum wage isn't going to happen.

Sweet!

[Elegiac]

"I found that for the typical study in the middle of the range of demonstrated effects, when average pay of affected workers rises by 10 percent after a mandated wage increase, their employment falls by at most 2 percent."

Hmmm let's see what the WHOLE paragraph says, shall we...

But the studies that found job losses of that scale large tended to focus on narrow groups of affected workers (often teens or young adults) — who may be particularly affected. When I focused on studies that looked at overall low-wage workforce, the evidence on job losses were minute: In those cases, the job loss from the same 10 percent increase in average wage of affected workers amounts to maybe 0.5 percent. At that level of job loss, the wage gains far offset the losses: The low-wage workforce as a whole is better off from the policy.

Huh.

Also:

For one thing, its report examines only 11 studies; these overlap with, but are not as comprehensive as, those I reviewed for the British Treasury report. (Tellingly, its sources include the first University of Washington study but not the follow-up that came to a more positive conclusion.) The CBO also changed its formula for summarizing the literature since the last time it looked at this question (in 2019). Back then, it looked at the median result of the 11 papers; this time, it placed more weight on those that found large job losses. The 2019 report was already somewhat out of step with the latest academic research, but the new one is even more so. It concludes that a 10 percent increase in average wages of affected workers would lead to a 4.8 percent fall in employment — far above what I and others have found. That’s how it arrives at the figure of 1.4 million lost jobs. Based on my own review of the overall evidence but still following CBO’s approach, I would estimate that a national minimum wage increase to $15 per hour would lead to job losses under 500,000.

The CBO high balled it and even generous application of its methodology doesn't demonstrate a causative relationship between job loss and minimum wage.

/yawn

[Machismo]

Nice selective editing.



Also:



The CBO high balled it and even generous application of its methodology doesn't demonstrate a causative relationship between job loss and minimum wage.

/yawn

I simply pointed to YOUR SELECTIVE EDITING...

Luckily, I provided the entire report, enjoy!!!

[Elegiac]

Well, then there's no wonder the $15 minimum wage isn't going to happen.

Sweet!

Good to know you support exploitation as long as it's the default, lol.

[Machismo]

Good to know you support exploitation as long as it's the default, lol.

I'm supporting liberty and capitalism, that's my default.

In this case, since it looks like the $15 minimum wage isn't going to happen, then liberty wins.

[Elegiac]

I simply pointed to YOUR SELECTIVE EDITING...

Luckily, I provided the entire report, enjoy!!!

This is the entire report, apparently: "I found that for the typical study in the middle of the range of demonstrated effects, when average pay of affected workers rises by 10 percent after a mandated wage increase, their employment falls by at most 2 percent." /s

[Machismo]

This is the entire report, apparently: "I found that for the typical study in the middle of the range of demonstrated effects, when average pay of affected workers rises by 10 percent after a mandated wage increase, their employment falls by at most 2 percent." /s

Nope, the entire report was provided.

Did you read it?

Come back when you do.

[Elegiac]

I'm supporting liberty and capitalism, that's my default.

Supporting liberty and supporting exploitation simultaneously sort of explains why your political positions are all over the place, tbh.

[Fugus]

You think it's exploitation, and the vast majority of consumers and workers seem to disagree.

Actually, the vast majority of consumers and workers agree that minimum wage needs to go up and the existence of a minimum wage is needed.

The problem is the system that exists that they are forced into a system that exploits them and the only way to address it is.......

GOVERNMENT!

And you haven’t given a single alternative that is workable outside of unions which will take decades to build up before it can be workable in the US and even then will require GOVERNMENT regulation to protect it and give it any power.

[Elegiac]

Nope, the entire report was provided.

Did you read it?

Come back when you do.

Yes, I did, which is why I was able to provide the quotes that you omitted that support Phaelix' post about the "2%" number being among teenagers from the most generous application of the CBO's flawed methodology.

[Machismo]

Supporting liberty and supporting exploitation simultaneously sort of explains why your political positions are all over the place, tbh.

Not really, I'm pretty fucking consistent about supporting liberty.

Of course, if you have evidence to the contrary, I look forward to it. If not, I'll accept your retraction.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I did, which is why I was able to provide the quotes that you omitted that support Phaelix' post about the "2%" number being among teenagers.

Great, so why are you whining?

Enjoy!!!

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/202...nimum-Wage.pdf

[Elegiac]

Not really, I'm pretty fucking consistent about supporting liberty.

Then why do you support capitalism?

[Machismo]

Actually, the vast majority of consumers and workers agree that minimum wage needs to go up and the existence of a minimum wage is needed.

The problem is the system that exists that they are forced into a system that exploits them and the only way to address it is.......

GOVERNMENT!

And you haven’t given a single alternative that is workable outside of unions which will take decades to build up before it can be workable in the US and even then will require GOVERNMENT regulation to protect it and give it any power.

And yet, they don't seem to mind shopping at places that pay their employees less than $15 an hour.

That's rather revealing.

- - - Updated - - -

Then why do you support capitalism?

That seems like an obvious answer...

You find that evidence, yet? You have one more post.