Does Romney's support of minimum wage indicate shift in GOP?

[RACJ]

Yes, and the first responsibility for people is also survival. People are unable to make ends meet in great numbers, I think that is more than worth serious consideration. As I said more than once up thread I’m not anti business, as a matter of fact I think more entrepreneurship is a good thing but not everyone is able to make that happen and in the short term food on the table is the necessity. I think there needs to be serious changes to our economic model. I don’t want to drive businesses to close their doors but businesses are not monolith, and to say they are overburdened is again an over simplification when many businesses have CEO’s making 300-450 times more than the lowest level employees. There will always be a wage gap between business owners and their lowest level employees but I just cannot wrap my brain around CEO’s that make on average of $8,000 an hr having an issue with raising minimum wage to one where a family or worker is not still dependant on the government for healthcare and food stamps. As an aside, I regret that these threads more times than not venture into bashing the President. If we agree with a sitting President or not we should refrain from name calling, because they are the sitting President of the United States. With that said capitalist success does demand an equal playing field but the playing field is not equal, not even close.

Felicity, you are talking about Fortune 500 CEO’s, not mom and pop businesses and franchises. I have no soft spot for executives (or entertainers) who command ridiculous salaries, but I would rather have the money in the hands of these private individuals to dispose of as they see fit, than in the mitts government apparatchiks who do not create one cent of wealth, but instead enrich themselves while choosing economic winners and losers (usually based upon political connections).
As MY aside, I am unafraid to criticize the hostility of this man Obama, who in every speech and action pits men against women, black against white, gay against straight, old against young and entrepreneur against employee. I KNEW before he took office that his philosophy would lead to economic decline and, potentially, total collapse. Every policy has exacerbated existing problems, and this was all too predictable. WE are becoming one more failed state in a world littered with them.
Unless people begin to realize that HE and his fellow statists are responsible for our continuing recession, all hope of a better life for our posterity will be lost. Blessings, Rob

 

[ishii]

So you agree on the comments by George McGovern on regulation in business? And you also agree that regulations are mainly a vehicle for empowering and enriching lawyers (who in turn donate huge sums of money to Democrats) ? I only ask because you didn’t comment at all on that part of my post.

The average effective corporate tax rate among those who actually pay taxes is only 12.6% so, in actuality, we have one of the lowest corporate tax rates among industrialized nations.

Here is an article written byJack Mintz and Duanjie Chen who assert, among other things that:

1)The marginal effective tax rate (METR) on corporate investment (i.e., the tax impact on capital investment as a portion of the cost of capital) is 35.3 percent in the U.S.—higher than in any other developed country.

2)The U.S. average effective tax rate on corporations (AETR) is irregular from year to year due to the complexity and instability of the corporate tax code. -

3)The U.S. has maintained the highest METR in the OECD since 2007, when Canada’s multiyear program of corporate tax reform brought its METR below the G-7 average. Nonetheless, the White House and Treasury Department continue to assert that the U.S. has a lower METR than Canada by failing to properly account for sales and property taxes.

See more at: liftamericacoalition.org/2014/02/the-u-s-corporate-effective-tax-rate-myth-and-the-fact/#sthash.xXXrJdWB.dpuf

New York has a completely different taxi system than Washington DC so you’re comparing apples and oranges. New York has a medallion system which allows taxi drivers to pick up customers off the street who hail them. If you don’t purchase a medallion then you have to operate as a regular car service (what people outside of New York know as taxis) which responds to pick-up requests over the phone. Fares are also calculated differently in DC than they are in New York so its hard to draw any comparison between the two.

Over $700,000 for a Taxi license in New York.
But wait, there’s more:

• A taxi license in Milwaukee costs $150,000. Similar type situations in Boston and Chicago.
• In order to do African style braiding of hair in Utah you need a license that is only obtained after you spend thousands on Cosmetology school. Historically these huge costs to get the licenses needed to enter certain industries have hurt minorities such as blacks. Maybe its easier to give handouts than let certain minorities get their foot in the door as electricians or plumbers. Or hair braiders.

Oil is a global commodity so it doesn’t matter how many barrels the United States alone produces.

Right. More supply of oil does not mean lower prices.

So pull the plug on oil, gas, coal, and utility subsidies and see how long the poor last on fossil fuels. While we're at it, the taxpayers can stop paying to maintain the infrastructure of utility companies and we can see how long we all have electricity flowing to our homes. You're not going to win by comparing alternative energy to a source of energy and delivery on life support courtesy of the taxpayers.

Better yet, let’s allow the market to decide without investments from government. That includes no billions for failed green energy projects. I highly doubt liberals would sign on to that as they believe government should interfere heavily in all aspects of industry.

Ishii

 

[freeRadical]

nclej.org/poverty-in-the-us.php

Census figures released in September 2013 confirm that record-high numbers of Americans are living in poverty. The latest data reveal:

One out of seven people in the USA are living in poverty.

In 2012, 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States—the largest number in the 54 years the Census has measured poverty.

The poverty rate (the percentage of all people in the United States who were poor) also remained at high levels: 15% for all Americans and 21.8% for children under age 18.

The United States Bureau of the Census measures poverty by comparing household income to the poverty threshold for a household of a given size. The poverty threshold is adjusted each year to take account of changes in the cost-of-living. The poverty threshold is not, however, representative of what a family actually needs for a decent living. For example, in 2012, the weighted average poverty threshold for a household of four was only $23,492.

Almost one out of sixteen people in the USA are living in deep poverty.

People with income 50% below the poverty line are commonly referred to as living in deep poverty; Census figures show that, in 2012, 6.6% of our population, or 20.4 million people, were living in deep poverty.

Our standard of living may be higher in here in America, but the poverty rates are still very large.

LOVE!

As usual Robert, you completely ignored most of my post. The federal poverty level is our definition of poor. Poverty is relative, wouldn’t you agree? We have very generous welfare programs and a very generous safety net in this country. I’m sure most of the people in the third world would love to be a poor person in the US. As I said before, what level of income we take as poverty is higher then the average income in most of the world.

 

[Robert_Sock]

As usual Robert, you completely ignored most of my post. The federal poverty level is our definition of poor. Poverty is relative, wouldn’t you agree? We have very generous welfare programs and a very generous safety net in this country. I’m sure most of the people in the third world would love to be a poor person in the US. As I said before, what level of income we take as poverty is higher then the average income in most of the world.

Yes, the standard of living is much greater here in America than in third-world countries, especially comparing us to those living in extreme poverty. But what you fail to take into account is the much larger cost of living in America, which makes it very difficult for wage-workers to make ends meet. I think of it in terms of the amount of stress, pain and suffering an individual experiences from their poverty, and not from people’s standard of living per se.

LOVE!

 

[freeRadical]

Yes, the standard of living is much greater here in America than in third-world countries, especially comparing us to those living in extreme poverty. But what you fail to take into account is the much larger cost of living in America, which makes it very difficult for wage-workers to make ends meet. I think of it in terms of the amount of stress, pain and suffering an individual experiences from their poverty, and not from people’s standard of living per se.

LOVE!

Do you know how much is spent on social welfare programs in the US? Do you know how much people pay in taxes to support these programs? Do you ever think about the hard working parents trying to raise kids and make ends meet, all the stress worrying about how they are going to pay their bills, pay for all the things their kids need, and put food on the table? All the while, a significant portion of their income goes to pay taxes to support social welfare programs that haven’t really done anything to alleviate poverty in this country. Do you ever think about the burden the government places on the ordinary middle class person through taxation?

 

[Robert_Sock]

Do you know how much is spent on social welfare programs in the US? Do you know how much people pay in taxes to support these programs? Do you ever think about the hard working parents trying to raise kids and make ends meet, all the stress worrying about how they are going to pay their bills, pay for all the things their kids need, and put food on the table? All the while, a significant portion of their income goes to pay taxes to support social welfare programs that haven’t really done anything to alleviate poverty in this country. Do you ever think about the burden the government places on the ordinary middle class person through taxation?

I’m no economist, but I would venture to say that tax money is really quite trivial to the Federal Government, and is done more out of show than anything else. It’s all relative, and the government can print up as much money as they like. Would those who are taxed feel any better if the tax was paid by the employer and the hourly rate went down to compensate? Yes, I believe they would feel better.

LOVE!

 

[Deltadeliquent]

Raise the minimum wage to $15+ and hour. But make it age related. Younger kids working after school get less, and their grandparents working to top up a pension decimated by the economy get the full wage.
Fair.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Raise the minimum wage to $15+ and hour. But make it age related. Younger kids working after school get less, and their grandparents working to top up a pension decimated by the economy get the full wage.
Fair.

Why should we pay a higher wage to bad money managers?

 

[RACJ]

I’m no economist, but I would venture to say that tax money is really quite trivial to the Federal Government, and is done more out of show than anything else. It’s all relative, and the government can print up as much money as they like. Would those who are taxed feel any better if the tax was paid by the employer and the hourly rate went down to compensate? Yes, I believe they would feel better.

LOVE!

I don’t see your point, Robert. It doesn’t matter if a tax lightens your wallet indirectly or directly. Working families still have the same level of difficulty paying their bills, and will be the same dollar amount from bankruptcy.
Already, years ago, a system was set forth whereby government PRETENDS that your employer pays half of your social security tax, but in reality, WE pay it all based upon our individual salaries or wages. Rob

P.S. This is the first time that I have ever heard anyone dismiss the punitive taxes that Americans pay as “trivial” amounts “done…out of show”. For struggling people, these taxes are destructive, far from “trivial”.

 

[Robert_Sock]

I don’t see your point, Robert. It doesn’t matter if a tax lightens your wallet indirectly or directly.

I would predict that taxes taken indirectly would reduce the anger that a person attributes to taxation. The anger that people harbor within themselves is not negligible.

LOVE!

 

[RACJ]

I would predict that taxes taken indirectly would reduce the anger that a person attributes to taxation. The anger that people harbor within themselves is not negligible. LOVE!

Which is a healthier emotion, anger focused at people resposible for your condition, or a nebulous, confused hopelessness? I’d rather not keep people in the dark. An informed electorate is a wiser electorate. :sad_yes:

 

[Brigid34]

Why should we pay a higher wage to bad money managers?

This is too ludicrous to comment on, however I will say this - some people have not had the financial “blessings” that apparently you have.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

So you agree on the comments by George McGovern on regulation in business? And you also agree that regulations are mainly a vehicle for empowering and enriching lawyers (who in turn donate huge sums of money to Democrats) ? I only ask because you didn’t comment at all on that part of my post.

No. We have regulations so that things like the Elk River chemical spill or the West Fertilizer Company plant explosion are not common occurrences. Both could have been prevented with stronger regulation.

1)The marginal effective tax rate (METR) on corporate investment (i.e., the tax impact on capital investment as a portion of the cost of capital) is 35.3 percent in the U.S.—higher than in any other developed country.

So you’ve moved on to capital gains taxes?

2)The U.S. average effective tax rate on corporations (AETR) is irregular from year to year due to the complexity and instability of the corporate tax code. -

Irregular, yes, but always among the lowest in industrialized nations.

3)The U.S. has maintained the highest METR in the OECD since 2007, when Canada’s multiyear program of corporate tax reform brought its METR below the G-7 average. Nonetheless, the White House and Treasury Department continue to assert that the U.S. has a lower METR than Canada by failing to properly account for sales and property taxes.

So you want lump property and sales taxes in with income taxes to balloon the tax rates when you compare with other countries?

Over $700,000 for a Taxi license in New York.
But wait, there’s more: - A taxi license in Milwaukee costs $150,000. Similar type situations in Boston and Chicago.

All of which have medallion systems as I explained before.

• In order to do African style braiding of hair in Utah you need a license that is only obtained after you spend thousands on Cosmetology school. Historically these huge costs to get the licenses needed to enter certain industries have hurt minorities such as blacks. Maybe its easier to give handouts than let certain minorities get their foot in the door as electricians or plumbers. Or hair braiders.

And you need at least a Bachelors degree to work in some fields. So what?

Right. More supply of oil does not mean lower prices.

Again, oil is a global commodity so prices are set based on global supply. So, for example, if the Untied States produces more oil but Saudi Arabia turns the spigot down a few notches to counter what the United States is doing then the price of oil won’t change. At the end of the day, its not only what is actually happening with supply globally but also what the people who participate in the three petroleum exchanges (New York Mercantile Exchange, International Petroleum Exchange, and Singapore International Monetary Exchange) speculate supply will be.

Better yet, let’s allow the market to decide without investments from government. That includes no billions for failed green energy projects. I highly doubt liberals would sign on to that as they believe government should interfere heavily in all aspects of industry.

And I’ll believe those who claim they want the government out of business when they start advocating for the removal of fossil fuel and utility companies from the taxpayers’ teat.

 

[Cider]

In answer to the OP, Romney doesn’t currently hold any political office nor is he running for one so I don’t see how his personal views are reflective on the GOP as a whole.

 

[Mickey_Finn]

CBO report: Minimum wage hike could cost 500,000 jobs

Raising the mimum wage may be too risky if there could be lots of job losses.

Here is what the CBO actually said.

Increasing the minimum wage would have two principal effects on low-wage workers. Most of them would receive higher pay that would increase their family’s income, and some of those families would see their income rise above the federal poverty threshold. But some jobs for low-wage workers would probably be eliminated, the income of most workers who became jobless would fall substantially, and the share of low-wage workers who were employed would probably fall slightly.

The $10.10 option would have substantially larger effects on employment and income than the $9.00 option would—because more workers would see their wages rise; the change in their wages would be greater; and, CBO expects, employment would be more responsive to a minimum-wage increase that was larger and was subsequently adjusted for inflation. The net effect of either option on the federal budget would probably be small.

Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.

www.cbo.gov/publication/44995

%between%

 

[ishii]

 No. We have regulations so that things like the Elk River chemical spill or the West Fertilizer Company plant explosion are not common occurrences. Both could have been prevented with stronger regulation.

So many regulations are merely to empower the Democrat interest group - lawyers. Those regulations need to be abolished or curtailed. McGovern acknowledge that. To not see that speaks volumes about ones ideological rigidity/partisanship.

So you’ve moved on to capital gains taxes?

Irregular, yes, but always among the lowest in industrialized nations.

So you want lump property and sales taxes in with income taxes to balloon the tax rates when you compare with other countries?

Here is a different take by an economist writing in that right wing newspaper, The NY Times:

"*I, like many economists, suspect that our corporate income tax is economically self-defeating — hurting workers, not capitalists, and collecting precious little revenue to boot.

The United States may well have the highest effective marginal corporate income tax rate of any developed country. Jack Mintz, a public finance economist and director of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary, puts the rate close to 35 percent, which is also the statutory rate. Other economists, using different techniques, calculate the marginal rate to be as low as 23 percent. But both figures are miles above zero.

They are also miles above our 13 percent average corporate income tax rate — the ratio of corporate taxes to total corporate profits. The fact that the marginal tax rate, whether 23 percent, 35 percent or somewhere in between, is so much larger than the average rate suggests that a sizable share of corporate profits and production is ending up overseas and untaxed*."

He goes on to explain how the high corporate tax rate in America is a bad thing. With all due respect to the Emperor, I will give more weight to the NY Times and the Economist on this issue of corporate tax rate.

All of which have medallion systems as I explained before.

So what? $700,000 for a license? Just regulations to protect special interest groups.

And you need at least a Bachelors degree to work in some fields. So what?

So the license required to braid hair has nothing to do with braiding hair and everything to do with keeping certain people out. And as I’ve noted, many of those people are minorities. Common sense would suggest that some licenses are necessary and some aren’t. For example - licenses to practice medicine are necessary. An expensive license to braid hair is not. To understand that requires one to not be so ideologically rigid as to reject common sense.

Again, oil is a global commodity so prices are set based on global supply. So, for example, if the Untied States produces more oil but Saudi Arabia turns the spigot down a few notches to counter what the United States is doing then the price of oil won’t change. At the end of the day, its not only what is actually happening with supply globally but also what the people who participate in the three petroleum exchanges (New York Mercantile Exchange, International Petroleum Exchange, and Singapore International Monetary Exchange) speculate supply will be.

Yes, I understand that’s your mantra. Here is a different take:

The Obama administration is responsible for preventing a 30% increase in domestic oil production:

"*Two millions barrels per day of oil production would affect not just the price of gasoline in North America, but also the economics of world oil production: The president is preventing the U.S. from increasing oil production by an amount nearly equivalent to Iran’s total oil exports. He insists that gasoline prices are rising because of “fears” about a disruption in Iranian supply, but he wants you to believe that gasoline prices would be unaffected by a 30 percent increase in domestic U.S. oil production in the next two years.

If you’re gullible enough to believe that, consider this: The recession drove world oil demand from a peak of 86 million barrels per day in 2007 to a low of 85 million barrels per day in 2009. In the same period, the price of gasoline fell by half. We are once again entering a period of scarcity, where slight fluctuations in demand or supply will have a disproportionate impact on gas prices — but this time the scarcity is largely the product of Obama’s policies*."

And I’ll believe those who claim they want the government out of business when they start advocating for the removal of fossil fuel and utility companies from the taxpayers’ teat.

Agree - we should not prop up any businesses with taxpayer money. But that is to evade the point that hundreds of millions - perhaps billions have gone to prop up failed green energy.

Ishii

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

So many regulations are merely to empower the Democrat interest group - lawyers. Those regulations need to be abolished or curtailed. McGovern acknowledge that. To not see that speaks volumes about ones ideological rigidity/partisanship.

If businesses could be trusted to police themselves then the people of West Viriginia wouldn’t have gone without clean water because of a company too cheap to maintain their chemical tanks properly. Regulation is needed.

Here is a different take by an economist writing in that right wing newspaper, The NY Times:

"*I, like many economists, suspect that our corporate income tax is economically self-defeating — hurting workers, not capitalists, and collecting precious little revenue to boot.

The United States may well have the highest effective marginal corporate income tax rate of any developed country. Jack Mintz, a public finance economist and director of the School of Public Policy at the University of Calgary, puts the rate close to 35 percent, which is also the statutory rate. Other economists, using different techniques, calculate the marginal rate to be as low as 23 percent. But both figures are miles above zero.

They are also miles above our 13 percent average corporate income tax rate — the ratio of corporate taxes to total corporate profits. The fact that the marginal tax rate, whether 23 percent, 35 percent or somewhere in between, is so much larger than the average rate suggests that a sizable share of corporate profits and production is ending up overseas and untaxed*."

He goes on to explain how the high corporate tax rate in America is a bad thing. With all due respect to the Emperor, I will give more weight to the NY Times and the Economist on this issue of corporate tax rate.

I sense a lot of trickle down hogwash there.

So what? $700,000 for a license? Just regulations to protect special interest groups.

Then don’t buy a medallion.

So the license required to braid hair has nothing to do with braiding hair and everything to do with keeping certain people out. And as I’ve noted, many of those people are minorities. Common sense would suggest that some licenses are necessary and some aren’t. For example - licenses to practice medicine are necessary. An expensive license to braid hair is not. To understand that requires one to not be so ideologically rigid as to reject common sense.

The fact of the matter is that businesses do not want unlicensed people chopping away at their customers’ hair. They want licensed cosmetologists.

Yes, I understand that’s your mantra.

It isn’t my “mantra.” Its an indisputable fact. Its how the world economy works. And by the way, the United States is producing more oil now than we have in over 20 years. Unfortunately the OPEC member states have been cutting their production so if you want to point fingers then you’re doing it in the wrong direction.

Agree - we should not prop up any businesses with taxpayer money. But that is to evade the point that hundreds of millions - perhaps billions have gone to prop up failed green energy.

I haven’t seen any evidence that green energy businesses have failed at a higher rate than the norm for businesses.

 

[saintjohnxxiii]

If businesses could be trusted to police themselves then the people of West Viriginia wouldn’t have gone without clean water because of a company too cheap to maintain their chemical tanks properly. Regulation is needed.

I sense a lot of trickle down hogwash there.

Then don’t buy a medallion.

The fact of the matter is that businesses do not want unlicensed people chopping away at their customers’ hair. They want licensed cosmetologists.

It isn’t my “mantra.” Its an indisputable fact. Its how the world economy works. And by the way, the United States is producing more oil now than we have in over 20 years. Unfortunately the OPEC member states have been cutting their production so if you want to point fingers then you’re doing it in the wrong direction.

I haven’t seen any evidence that green energy businesses have failed at a higher rate than the norm for businesses.

Shouldn’t we trust customers (the people that make all businesses work) with who should cut their hair. Requiring a license to cut hair strikes of a cartel. Are you in favor of hair cartels but not oil cartels?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Shouldn’t we trust customers (the people that make all businesses work) with who should cut their hair. Requiring a license to cut hair strikes of a cartel. Are you in favor of hair cartels but not oil cartels?

Would you walk up to some random person on the street, hand them a pair of scissors, and trust them to give you a good haircut? Or do you go to an establishment where people with licenses in cosmetology are offering their services? Some people do choose to go to places like an Aveda student salon, but they know that the risk is their hair will be butchered by an as yet inexperienced and unlicensed student. Most people don’t want to take that risk.

 

[ishii]

 If businesses could be trusted to police themselves then the people of West Viriginia wouldn't have gone without clean water because of a company too cheap to maintain their chemical tanks properly. Regulation is needed.

Strawman alert. I never said “no regulation.” I said, less regulation and eliminate nonsensical regulation there exists merely to empower lawyers and aggrandize the Democrat party. i.e. common sense.

I sense a lot of trickle down hogwash there.

I sense an ad hominem. And way to not address the substance of the NY Times article. Again, with all due respect to old Emp, I defer to the NY Times and the Economist on this issue.

Then don’t buy a medallion.

The medallion system is basically indentured servitude to those who can afford the 700K (in NY city) to buy them. Here is a link to an interesting article about them:

blog.priceonomics.com/post/47636506327/the-tyranny-of-the-taxi-medallions

And now ride sharing apps are threatening the old system. But the entrenched powers are appealing to municipal govt. to outlaw these new “taxis.”

The fact of the matter is that businesses do not want unlicensed people chopping away at their customers’ hair. They want licensed cosmetologists.

You apparently don’t understand braiding. Let me help you:

Braid: 3.interwoven strands of hair: a length of hair divided into three or more interwoven strands and worn down the back

Haircut: 1.cutting of somebody’s hair: a session in which somebody’s hair is cut

 It isn't my "mantra." Its an indisputable fact. Its how the world economy works. And by the way, the United States is producing more oil now than we have in over 20 years. Unfortunately the OPEC member states have been cutting their production so if you want to point fingers then you're doing it in the wrong direction.

I haven’t seen any evidence that green energy businesses have failed at a higher rate than the norm for businesses.

More drilling and efficiency of supply - (i.e. pipelines) = less reliance on foreign oil. Apparently Obama would prefer to neglect fossil fuel - coal, oil, etc. in favor of “green energy” which is still not capable of providing for our energy needs. I believe Obama’s secretary of energy said, *“We have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” * Oh well, what does one expect from a community organizer president who knows nothing about how a successful business or economy works. Typical leftist: its not about what works, but how faithful you are to your ideology. Faithful. Obama Democrats have more faith than your average holy roller. The problem is their faith is in a failed ideology.

There may indeed come a time when Green technology reaches the point where it can efficiently and cheaply provide energy for an industrial economy. We are not there yet. So drill and explore we must.

Here is a link to a partial list of companies which failed despite aid from Obama:

dividedstates.com/list-of-failed-obama-green-energy-solar-companies/

Ishii