More Americans Die of Poverty than Terrorism

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

I don't think I said Black people.

You didn't have to.

The fact of the matter is that you made a cliche' white privilege statement that implies that you have the power to engage in a topic that references race without being accused of being interested in and perceivably obsessed with race.

You just happened to use me as an illustration because, although I don't give a shit about your username, you consistently care about mine.

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Upon request, yes. Not out of interest.

Of course you would use that logic. See my above reply.

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

I still have absolutely no interest in your race baiting.

Oh praise Jesus for white people who say stupid things like "race baiting" and "race card." The most amusing part is that I was only responding to Elephant Walk's and knight_shadow's posts. I swear we'd all go to Race Hell if white people like Elephant Walk weren't here to announce when the race-correlated discussion is over. Time to pretend it was always only an economic discussion. I hope white people like Elephant Walk let me talk about race correlates again sometime soon on GC. Maybe even a GC Race War. Woohoo. Lord knows Black folks such as myself think about race 24/7. I promise not to scare the white people like Elephant Walk who are often forced into race discussions. In Black baby Jesus' name we pray, Amen.

[Senusret I]

[DrPhil]

Hallelujerrrrrr!

He has that "is I gon be a low wage Black Jesus, mommy?" look in his eyes.

[Senusret I]

With the high-five and Eddie Long toupee. Praise be to black baby Jesus.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I feel like you're exaggerating for effect here - the actors are assumed to act rationally within the context of the market.



Completely irrelevant. (Or, to oversimplify - it doesn't.)



This isn't the assumption at all. The assumption is that workers would necessarily benefit from a competitive, efficient market because they are necessary players and contribute directly to the employer's bottom line.

It's insane to suggest that employers would slash everything across the board with no outcry or consequence - would you patronize such a place? I most likely wouldn't. It's the Whole Foods concept taken to a grander scale.



I think you're confusing topics here, or you're possibly misusing "market" in this sense - this isn't about the stock market, or even one select type of business. Not at all.



You're creating a series of false dilemmas. The only two options aren't "no regulation" or "current levels of regulation" - and deregulation doesn't mean elimination of all fail-safes. Just like azgz pointed out, many types of market regulations cause market inefficiencies. Who pays for those inefficiencies? It's not rich people, in general.

It might seem counterintuitive for you to read these things, but that doesn't make them wrong - history is littered with well-meaning but ultimately counter-productive policies. It's all well and good to say that "minimum wages automatically protect workers" but that statement isn't simply correct on its face - we need to make sure it is actually true in all situations. EW is saying that minimum wage laws protect workers who already have jobs at the expense of those who don't - that could very well be literally more correct than the former.

If it is, then it's part of the unemployment (and thus poverty) problem, and not part of the solution. Much like saying "employers always pay the least" (which is blatantly and demonstrably false), it sounds correct to say "minimum wages are good for workers" but that doesn't make it true.

I'm not sure why you're explaining what EW says as I feel like not only do you totally misunderstand my point but I'm having no problems understanding what he is saying and disagreeing with it on my own. Nor did I ever say that all places would replace workers with sweat shops. Although you neglect to take into consideration whether people would have an option not to patronize such an imaginary place due to location or income.

He thinks minimum wages hurt workers, I think a lack of minimum wage would hurt them more.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AGDee

In my experience, employers ALWAYS pay as little as they can get away with. This is why we've lost vacation days, pay more for benefits, have seen pay cuts or no raises in 2-3 years, cut tuition reimbursement, eliminated retirement matching, etc. In every non-union employment situation I've ever seen, it is common place to increase salary ranges for specific titles but not move the people who are working in that range until, eventually, people with 20 years experience are making 50 cents an hour more than new grads. And, all the while, they say "You're lucky we're not laying people off" and the companies are posting profits. It may be blatantly and demonstrably false for the upper executives who take care of their own, but it's blatantly and demonstrably TRUE for the rest of us.

To be fair though, isn't your personal experience limited to an area which currently has ~14% unemployment? If labor follows supply vs. demand, it would seem that the prices employers were paying for labor would fall. Why is it not fair that wages would sink in a buyer's market for labor?

Companies are posting profits, but we still have massively high unemployment. Do companies exist to post profits or to pay employees?

That aside, we're talking about deaths due to poverty, particularly homelessness. I'm not sure that labor markets really enter into the conversation as much as the resources and care we give to people with mental health issues.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I'm not sure why you're explaining what EW says as I feel like not only do you totally misunderstand my point but I'm having no problems understanding what he is saying and disagreeing with it on my own. Nor did I ever say that all places would replace workers with sweat shops. Although you neglect to take into consideration whether people would have an option not to patronize such an imaginary place due to location or income.

Fair enough - but questions like "Who does the market favor?" or pointing out that the market shits its pants when Steve Jobs does something really seem like you're misapplying microecon theory, or confusing it with common usage of "market" and "rational" (which are massively different than the econ usages).

If you're not, that's my bad, and clearly a limit to the message board medium and my own idiocy.

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

The fact of the matter is that you made a cliche' white privilege statement that implies that you have the power to engage in a topic that references race without being accused of being interested in and perceivably obsessed with race.

Yawn. I made no statements to suggest an obsession that and your logic (which includes stereotyping and generalizations) is faulty at best and at worst, racist.

You just happened to use me as an illustration because, although I don't give a shit about your username, you consistently care about mine.

How do I care about your username?

Oh praise Jesus for white people who say stupid things like "race baiting" and "race card." The most amusing part is that I was only responding to Elephant Walk's and knight_shadow's posts. I swear we'd all go to Race Hell if white people like Elephant Walk weren't here to announce when the race-correlated discussion is over.

I didn't announce it. Goodness you are quite dense. I personally have no interest in debating it, but you usually do due to your illogical backwards theories. If you have interest in it, go ahead. I have no interest in participating. Economics are interesting, your ridiculous conception of race is not.

Time to pretend it was always only an economic discussion.

It was. The entire conversation was about comparative advantage.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Yawn. I made no statements to suggest an obsession that and your logic (which includes stereotyping and generalizations) is faulty at best and at worst, racist.

I didn't announce it. Goodness you are quite dense. I personally have no interest in debating it, but you usually do due to your illogical backwards theories. If you have interest in it, go ahead. I have no interest in participating. Economics are interesting, your ridiculous conception of race is not.

It was. The entire conversation was about comparative advantage.

This post is so dumb that it is baffling.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by da.most

Asians are the most qualified. Asian immigrants usually come here with nothing but at the end of the day the Asians have the highest per capita income. How do you explain that fact?

Le, C.N. 2010. "The Model Minority Image: Balancing Praise and Caution." Asian-Nation: The Landscape of Asian America.

http://www.asian-nation.org/headline...raise-caution/

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by da.most

What is your point?

Le, C.N. 2010. "The Model Minority Image: Balancing Praise and Caution." Asian-Nation: The Landscape of Asian America.

http://www.asian-nation.org/headline...raise-caution/

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by da.most

You have atttended too many angry black men rallies.

Minimum wage does not deny anyone the opportunity to get an education. The real problem is your people don't care about education and they usually quit school.


If we did away with minimum wage do you think your opportunities will increase? If so then how?

*cue Alanis Morissette*

It's like raaaaaaain on your wedding day....

EW: Make sure you send in your Black People dues by next Thursday.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

EW: Make sure you send in your Black People dues by next Thursday.

Dead.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

*cue Alanis Morissette*

It's like raaaaaaain on your wedding day....

EW: Make sure you send in your Black People dues by next Thursday.

Elephant Walk was only talking about comparative advantage and the economy. How'd that sneaky race get in there? LOL.

[PiKA2001]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

*cue Alanis Morissette*

It's like raaaaaaain on your wedding day....

EW: Make sure you send in your Black People dues by next Thursday.

HA!