|
|
#61
07-27-2006, 11:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What about the great depression. There were all sorts of min wage/wage subsidy laws, and massive unemployment. [/ QUOTE ] First US minimum wage: 1933. Great Depression: began in 1929. Where's your point? [/ QUOTE ] The Great Depression was a worldwide economic downturn, starting in 1929 (although its effects were not fully felt until late in 1930) and lasting through most of the 1930s. ???? 
|
|
#62
07-27-2006, 11:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What about the great depression. There were all sorts of min wage/wage subsidy laws, and massive unemployment. [/ QUOTE ] First US minimum wage: 1933. Great Depression: began in 1929. Where's your point? [/ QUOTE ] The Great Depression was a worldwide economic downturn, starting in 1929 (although its effects were not fully felt until late in 1930) and lasting through most of the 1930s. ???? [/ QUOTE ] Obviously we both use wikipedia. But I think lehighguy was implying that minimum wage laws fed the unemployment. But the unemployment began before the laws existed.
|
|
#63
07-27-2006, 11:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What about the great depression. There were all sorts of min wage/wage subsidy laws, and massive unemployment. [/ QUOTE ] First US minimum wage: 1933. Great Depression: began in 1929. Where's your point? [/ QUOTE ] The Great Depression was a worldwide economic downturn, starting in 1929 (although its effects were not fully felt until late in 1930) and lasting through most of the 1930s. ???? [/ QUOTE ] Obviously we both use wikipedia. But I think lehighguy was implying that minimum wage laws fed the unemployment. But the unemployment began before the laws existed. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think anyone thinks that labor laws lead to the great depression. But it certainly helped contribute to how long it lasted.
|
|
#65
07-27-2006, 11:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
Can you prove that? [/ QUOTE ] Of course not. Can anyone prove anything in macroeconomics?
|
|
#66
07-28-2006, 12:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] But it will be interesting to see if the implementation of this in a big city like Chicago will actually cause all these stores to leave, as all the minimum wage doomsayers were predicting on this board a few months ago, or whether, as I predicted, most stores will simply stay and raise prices a little. [/ QUOTE ] But this just hurts everyone that SHOPS at Wal-Mart! The wage increase means that all the poor people shopping at Wal-Mart now have to pay increased prices for their goods, making them all POORER. [/ QUOTE ] Poor people and people who work at Walmart aren't the only people who shop at Walmart. [/ QUOTE ] No, although they do constitute the majority (depending on how you define "poor.") But that's not the point. The point is that this is an artificial barrier that forces prices to rise. High prices of desirable goods are bad. They restrict the supply, meaning that people now have access to fewer goods. They can't afford what they could otherwise. Hell, it may even be good for the GDP, but the inevitable point is that <u>everyone else in the economy is poorer.</u>
|
|
#67
07-28-2006, 12:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Can you prove that? [/ QUOTE ] Of course not. Can anyone prove anything in macroeconomics? [/ QUOTE ] Right, but they can observe and make assumptions and hyptheses based on observation. And from what I've said, more so than charts show, higher minimum wages do not necessarily equate to unemployment.
|
|
#68
07-28-2006, 12:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Can you prove that? [/ QUOTE ] Of course not. Can anyone prove anything in macroeconomics? [/ QUOTE ] Right, but they can observe and make assumptions and hyptheses based on observation. And from what I've said, more so than charts show, higher minimum wages do not necessarily equate to unemployment. [/ QUOTE ] I agree. Sometimes unemployment is low IN SPITE OF higher minimum wages.
|
|
#69
07-28-2006, 02:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
...it will be interesting to see if the implementation of this in a big city like Chicago will actually cause all these stores to leave, [/ QUOTE ] Here's your answer: article from chicago tribune From the article: [ QUOTE ] In an interview at Wal-Mart's Chicago office last week, Lewis said if the city council approved the bill, Wal-Mart would "put more time and effort in the suburbs," in particular focusing on those close to the city in order to draw shoppers across city lines. "It would stand to reason that we would ring Chicago with Supercenters," Lewis said." [/ QUOTE ] Duh. natedogg
|
|
#70
07-28-2006, 08:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: City of Chicago Mandates a Living Wage for workers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] ...it will be interesting to see if the implementation of this in a big city like Chicago will actually cause all these stores to leave, [/ QUOTE ] Here's your answer: article from chicago tribune From the article: [ QUOTE ] In an interview at Wal-Mart's Chicago office last week, Lewis said if the city council approved the bill, Wal-Mart would "put more time and effort in the suburbs," in particular focusing on those close to the city in order to draw shoppers across city lines. "It would stand to reason that we would ring Chicago with Supercenters," Lewis said." [/ QUOTE ] Duh. natedogg [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I read that too, however they're just saying that at this point clearly because they want the measure to fail. I doubt it will be so unprofitable that they, or any stores like them, will avoid opening any stores in the city of Chicago.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
