Yes, I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning
And for Mr. Lirpa,
When was the last time you stepped on a diaper and got poo all over your shoes and tracked it around and got it in your car or on your carpet or had to spend 15 minutes scuffing your feet in the grass trying to get it off? Nobody is denying that all animals poo. We just don't want to step in it. Is that too much to ask? Clean up after your dogs, you selfish pricks.
Why does the Mercury continue to antagonize a significant percentage of its readership by trying to discredit our views on 1) fluoride and 2) vaccines? I am guessing 50% + or - of your readers are AGAINST putting these things in our bodies or our children's bodies. We may have different views than you but we are not dumb. We can cite experts and medical studies of our own. How about we call a truce and leave it alone? You're not going to convince us and we are not going to convince you.
$15 an hour is a compassionate but misguided idea. It violates the laws of supply and demand. It willl result in a) cost being passed on to consumers, essentially a tax; or b) consumers not willing to pay and business having to cut staff; or c) costs passed on but then the price of everything else will inflate eventually and we're back where we started.
Guys this is basic. I understand compassion and wanting to help others. But let's actually think this through:
* IT IS A ZERO SUM GAME !
* The money has to come from somewhere. Only the federal government gets to "create" new money.
* Will the business owners take it out of their profit? Not likely. They will try to pass it on.
* Will consumers want to pay it? That is a value judgment for every individual consumer.
* If consumers don't want to pay it, the business owner must cut costs some other way. This includes cutting staff.
* If the cost is successfully passed on to consumers, then wealth is being redistributed from the lower and middle-class (assumption here that they are the primary consumers) to the lower class.
* Will this redistribute money from the wealthy to the lower class? Answer: Not much.
* Will it in effect be a tax on every one else? Answer: Yes.
So what we have here is a compassionate but misguided attempt to help the poor that does little to change the real systemic/structural issues our country has with economic inequality. What we need are changes to our tax system (how about taxing capital gains and carried interest the same as regular income, for example) and regulation of executive compensation.
"An arbitrary hike in the price of a product does not benefit sellers, it drives away buyers." -ZeroHedge
Where is that money going to come from? If it is just passed on to us, the consumer, you and me, it is just going to inflate the price of everything, and in the long run none of us are going to be better off. What is more important is the relative difference in wealth between the owners/executives/managers (highly paid) and the front line troops (low paid). It is a structural thing.
It's the relative difference that is important, not an absolute difference.
Unfortuantely, that is much harder to change. It requires a change in values, regulation, and tax policy. Not just a simple rule to bump up X to X+1.
see here for a great article:
Is Surging Inequality Endemic To Capitalism?
All Comments »
All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
Contact Info |
Production Guidelines |