Even though he so elequently attempted to say that I hadn't thought of those that were only working min wage jobs out of necessity...I in fact did account for just that. He simply failed to read that far into my statement.
Its true. Hidden within this statement:
<<If you ASPIRE to work a minimum wage job and nothing more, you are a complete loser and are probably selling yourself short.>>
in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. ![]()
Even though he so elequently attempted to say that I hadn't thought of those that were only working min wage jobs out of necessity...I in fact did account for just that. He simply failed to read that far into my statement.
Its true. Hidden within this statement:
<<If you ASPIRE to work a minimum wage job and nothing more, you are a complete loser and are probably selling yourself short.>>
in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. ![]()
I don't claim victory when the opposing party is akin to an intellectual special olympic contestant. ![]()
By the way, intelligent has two 'l's. ![]()
Thanks, however, pointing out spelling and grammatical errors is stiln's job. You just stepped all over his toes.
I don't claim victory when the opposing party is akin to an intellectual special olympic contestant. ![]()
By the way, intelligent has two 'l's. ![]()
Thanks, however, pointing out spelling and grammatical errors is stiln's job. You just stepped all over his toes.
Its true. Hidden within this statement:
<
in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. ![]()
I can't wait for stiln to point out that you spelled 'incredibly' wrong. I'm not one of those spelling/grammer correcters so I'm not gonna do it.
I can't believe I had to spend the last hour defending my statement because you have reading comprehension issues. How ironic that you call me the special olympic contestant...
<<in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. >> Thats exactly the reason I'm not on the SPP or the Spelling Police Patrol.
Its true. Hidden within this statement:
<
in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. ![]()
I can't wait for stiln to point out that you spelled 'incredibly' wrong. I'm not one of those spelling/grammer correcters so I'm not gonna do it.
I can't believe I had to spend the last hour defending my statement because you have reading comprehension issues. How ironic that you call me the special olympic contestant...
<<in credibly small font was your disclaimer. I somehow missed it. >> Thats exactly the reason I'm not on the SPP or the Spelling Police Patrol.
In economics, inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.[1] When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services. Consequently, inflation also reflects an erosion in the purchasing power of money – a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account in the economy.[2][3] A chief measure of price inflation is the inflation rate, the annualized percentage change in a general price index (normally the Consumer Price Index) over time.[4]
Inflation's effects on an economy are various and can be simultaneously positive and negative. Negative effects of inflation include a decrease in the real value of money and other monetary items over time, uncertainty over future inflation may discourage investment and savings, and high inflation may lead to shortages of goods if consumers begin hoarding out of concern that prices will increase in the future. Positive effects include ensuring central banks can adjust nominal interest rates (intended to mitigate recessions),[5] and encouraging investment in non-monetary capital projects.
Economists generally agree that high rates of inflation and hyperinflation are caused by an excessive growth of the money supply.[6] Views on which factors determine low to moderate rates of inflation are more varied. Low or moderate inflation may be attributed to fluctuations in real demand for goods and services, or changes in available supplies such as during scarcities, as well as to growth in the money supply. However, the consensus view is that a long sustained period of inflation is caused by money supply growing faster than the rate of economic growth.[7][8]
Today, most economists favor a low, steady rate of inflation.[9] Low (as opposed to zero or negative) inflation reduces the severity of economic recessions by enabling the labor market to adjust more quickly in a downturn, and reduces the risk that a liquidity trap prevents monetary policy from stabilizing the economy.[10] The task of keeping the rate of inflation low and stable is usually given to monetary authorities. Generally, these monetary authorities are the central banks that control monetary policy through the setting of interest rates, through open market operations, and through the setting of banking reserve requirements.[11]
the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate
In economics, inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.[1] When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services. Consequently, inflation also reflects an erosion in the purchasing power of money – a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account in the economy.[2][3] A chief measure of price inflation is the inflation rate, the annualized percentage change in a general price index (normally the Consumer Price Index) over time.[4]
Inflation's effects on an economy are various and can be simultaneously positive and negative. Negative effects of inflation include a decrease in the real value of money and other monetary items over time, uncertainty over future inflation may discourage investment and savings, and high inflation may lead to shortages of goods if consumers begin hoarding out of concern that prices will increase in the future. Positive effects include ensuring central banks can adjust nominal interest rates (intended to mitigate recessions),[5] and encouraging investment in non-monetary capital projects.
Economists generally agree that high rates of inflation and hyperinflation are caused by an excessive growth of the money supply.[6] Views on which factors determine low to moderate rates of inflation are more varied. Low or moderate inflation may be attributed to fluctuations in real demand for goods and services, or changes in available supplies such as during scarcities, as well as to growth in the money supply. However, the consensus view is that a long sustained period of inflation is caused by money supply growing faster than the rate of economic growth.[7][8]
Today, most economists favor a low, steady rate of inflation.[9] Low (as opposed to zero or negative) inflation reduces the severity of economic recessions by enabling the labor market to adjust more quickly in a downturn, and reduces the risk that a liquidity trap prevents monetary policy from stabilizing the economy.[10] The task of keeping the rate of inflation low and stable is usually given to monetary authorities. Generally, these monetary authorities are the central banks that control monetary policy through the setting of interest rates, through open market operations, and through the setting of banking reserve requirements.[11]
the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate
Originally posted by rooster010
<<the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate>>
If I could purchase a value meal for $5 and ten years later that same value meal for $8 how do you qualify that increase as miniscule? That is a 62% increase.
Originally posted by rooster010
<<the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate>>
If I could purchase a value meal for $5 and ten years later that same value meal for $8 how do you qualify that increase as miniscule? That is a 62% increase.
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
Whoa...I never said solely responsible as you have implied....but a large part of that increase is in due in fact to the increased cost of labor.
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
Whoa...I never said solely responsible as you have implied....but a large part of that increase is in due in fact to the increased cost of labor.
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
Look at this formula MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE + EROSION OF VALUE FOR MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE = ?
Labor is paid with that same medium of exchange which has had its value eroded.
Meanwhile the quality or amount of food you get in that same value meal has not increased.
that 62% increase has little to do with any minimum wage mandate and more so with erosion of value in your medium of exchange
are you saying that the 3 dollar "price increase" is directly attributed to an increase in the minimum wage![]()
absurd
Look at this formula MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE + EROSION OF VALUE FOR MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE = ?
Labor is paid with that same medium of exchange which has had its value eroded.
Meanwhile the quality or amount of food you get in that same value meal has not increased.
i did not imply shit
i simply asked a question
and i'll ask another
how to you quantify "a large part"?
what percentage of your value meals cost is associated with labor?
i did not imply shit
i simply asked a question
and i'll ask another
how to you quantify "a large part"?
what percentage of your value meals cost is associated with labor?
The bottom line still exists that minimum wage jobs are niether intended or designed for someone to support a family on or have people spend whole carreers doing that same function.
minimum wage jobs are for high school or college students to support themselves through school. Mostly high school students.
The bottom line still exists that minimum wage jobs are niether intended or designed for someone to support a family on or have people spend whole carreers doing that same function.
minimum wage jobs are for high school or college students to support themselves through school. Mostly high school students.
Increasing minimum wage has a small effect on inflation because only a minority of jobs pay minimum wage. Besides, companies may adapt by reducing costs through layouts and automation instead of raising prices. Multiplier effect on higher wage earners is overrated. Also minimum wage usually fail to keep up with inflation. Actually, governments devaluation of currency has a bigger impact on inflation.
Increasing minimum wage has a small effect on inflation because only a minority of jobs pay minimum wage. Besides, companies may adapt by reducing costs through layouts and automation instead of raising prices. Multiplier effect on higher wage earners is overrated. Also minimum wage usually fail to keep up with inflation. Actually, governments devaluation of currency has a bigger impact on inflation.
Whoa...I never said solely responsible as you have implied....but a large part of that increase is in due in fact to the increased cost of labor.
Whoa...I never said solely responsible as you have implied....but a large part of that increase is in due in fact to the increased cost of labor.
the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate
the miniscule increase in the price of goods due to any mandate regarding minimum wage levels pales in comparison to the massive erosion of your purchasing power (a loss of real value in the internal medium of exchange and unit of account) gauranteed by the FED
your dollar will buy less regardless of any minimum wage mandate
i believe historical fact
a $20 item in 1913 would cost $454.42 today
thats a 2172.1 % increase (not because of minimum wage mandates)
maybe you can point to a year that had negative inflation, but over time, wishing for your savings to appreciate is futile![]()
i believe historical fact
a $20 item in 1913 would cost $454.42 today
thats a 2172.1 % increase (not because of minimum wage mandates)
maybe you can point to a year that had negative inflation, but over time, wishing for your savings to appreciate is futile![]()
Its amazing how some people dont want to see other people get raises, but those very same people want raises at their jobs.
Everytime an insurance guy gets a raise, the insurance company has to raise their prices to pay for that. So its exactly the same thing as people at mickey d's getting to make more, so prices have to go up.
Some of you on this site, really need to start being a little more caring for your fellow human beings. It appears some of you were born with no heart and zero compassion for others.
Yeah in some perfect fantasy world, the prices of everything doesnt go up and everything stays the same forever.
Its amazing how some people dont want to see other people get raises, but those very same people want raises at their jobs.
Everytime an insurance guy gets a raise, the insurance company has to raise their prices to pay for that. So its exactly the same thing as people at mickey d's getting to make more, so prices have to go up.
Some of you on this site, really need to start being a little more caring for your fellow human beings. It appears some of you were born with no heart and zero compassion for others.
Yeah in some perfect fantasy world, the prices of everything doesnt go up and everything stays the same forever.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.