Bums asking for handouts

[iplaw]

quote:Ippy, You've traveled. What's that word the French use? You've been in one of those situations where someone was criticizing someone and it sounded like they were describing themselves. The French have a word for it. What's that word, Ippy?

Perhaps the word you're looking for is surrender Rev. Lovejoy?  

I think it's ville natale though...

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Well, when you consider that it says "Eveready" with a $40 price tag comes with a 30 day warranty and the average car battery costs about $30 to $40 more and comes with up to a 72 month pro-rated warranty, that should be your first clue.  You can be assured that some company in India is either making cheap-o car batteries for them, or the Indian company is paying a licensing fee to Eveready.  Either way, it's not the same quality control as their smaller batteries.  Not lampooning you WB, just saying that if no one was willing to buy a $40 car battery, they would not exist on the market.

The large consumer demand for low-priced goods doesn't help the wage picture.  It puts pressure on companies to control labor costs so either they continue to pay piss-poor wages here in U.S. factories, or they move over the border to Mexico, or set up shop in India or China.

Raising the minimum wage will result in more items being produced out of the country or inflation.  

We want higher wages, but we don't want the price of our consumer goods to go up.  If prices go up due to higher wages, then the mentality becomes that corporations are being greedy and sticking it to the consumer.  A higher minimum wage is a zero sum gain unless manufacturers move the jobs to an area where they can legally pay less for labor, in which case unemployment goes up.

I had three choices for a battery that would fit this 20yr old car. The higher priced battery by Eveready simply had a little more CCA and a longer warranty. The lowest priced was off brand with the same warranty. I went with the middle price. So their was an expectation of Eveready delivering a standard quality battery. There was simply no quality control. They were probably all three made in China. Doubtful Eveready would have different plants for different CCA's.

You low wage guys paint yourself into a corner using false assumptions. You ignore the past. Every time since I was a stock boy at Safeway and the minimum wage was 75 cents/hour I have listened to those arguments. Inflation, job loss, closing factories etc. And its never happened. Never. I even had to listen once to the owner of the Admiral Twin drive-in tell me at the gate one night that they were going to have to close if Clinton was elected and the minimum wage was raised. Both happened and he now owns both the Admiral and the Riverwalk movies.

The first assumption is that there is this unquenchable demand for lowest price goods. That comes from not having been on the planet as an adult consumer before 1975. Once you make that assumption then everything else falls in place and you all feel confident that anyone supporting a rise in the minimum wage is naive or supports inflation, shipping jobs overseas etc. ad nauseum.

Just for kicks, change the assumption. Did I really want the lowest price for my battery? No. Nor did I purchase the lowest price. I chose brand over price and relied on that corporation to come through for me. They didn't. Corp.s all over the country are sacrificing their brands that they worked hard to build for generations just to get in WalMarts door. They are afraid not to because they went to the same school of business you did.

Discriminating buyers of products that absolutely must work on a constant basis are willing to pay more and do pay more. I could have bought an Optima for more dollars and would have if it weren't going into a 20 yr old rusted Toyota.

This drive to keep wages low and move factories to China/Mexico etc. has little to do with labor costs being too high here. It has to do with company leadership that is out of touch with its own consumers and workers. The extreme spread of compensation between those who produce and those who manage is but one proof of that.  Do you think I will ever buy a (N)Eveready battery again? They have been added to my list of co.s that can't be trusted and are vulnerable to dissappear.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

Tulsa's Sunday newspaper Job section is full and overflowing with jobs, some even offer bonuses, and one ad I seen even offered advance paycheck cash of $50.00. I counted well over 100 job ads for unskilled general labor in Tulsa's Sunday paper, (the only hang up may be if someone has a criminal record then finding a job is not so simple)... However,rents are low in Tulsa compaired to other cities. The beggers just seem to be lazy folks in most cases.. or so it seems to me. thanx.

HT is right about one thing. This did not occur so much in the 70's. What has happened that it is so common now? You think it is laziness but that is a subjective analysis. Those jobs you see in the paper are piss poor jobs. The employers treat you like s**t because thats what they think you are. They plan to replace you as soon as you're spent and drag in the next gaggle of toxic workers. They use agents to hire you on temporary basis, which shows their committment to training. This also allows them to avoid the costs of real employment.

I hear this all the time, and it reminds me of Cinderella Man.  We don't have any idea of what a s**t job is in 2007, or what it is to truly have NOTHING.  Our "poor" are the richest in the world.

How many in the US actually live and support a family on minimum wage?  To save you reading the article, it's less than 1 million people...

With that being said, I really don't care if they up the minimum wage, hell, raise it to about $25 per hour. I just don't want you *****ing when small businesses and companies make drastic staffing cuts or relocate to compensate, and the unemployment stats skyrocket and our GDP takes a hit. BTW, you can't even begin to compare what happened in the 70's with the dynamic global economy we have now. While your personal observations are interesting, it's a new world today and a far more complex economic climate than it was 30+ years ago.

No other country provides you with the opportunities available in the US.  Educate yourself, work hard and persist.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

Tulsa's Sunday newspaper Job section is full and overflowing with jobs, some even offer bonuses, and one ad I seen even offered advance paycheck cash of $50.00. I counted well over 100 job ads for unskilled general labor in Tulsa's Sunday paper, (the only hang up may be if someone has a criminal record then finding a job is not so simple)... However,rents are low in Tulsa compaired to other cities. The beggers just seem to be lazy folks in most cases.. or so it seems to me. thanx.

HT is right about one thing. This did not occur so much in the 70's. What has happened that it is so common now? You think it is laziness but that is a subjective analysis. Those jobs you see in the paper are piss poor jobs. The employers treat you like s**t because thats what they think you are. They plan to replace you as soon as you're spent and drag in the next gaggle of toxic workers. They use agents to hire you on temporary basis, which shows their committment to training. This also allows them to avoid the costs of real employment.

I hear this all the time, and it reminds me of Cinderella Man.  We don't have any idea of what a s**t job is in 2007, or what it is to truly have NOTHING.  Our "poor" are the richest in the world.

How many in the US actually live and support a family on minimum wage?  To save you reading the article, it's less than 1 million people...

With that being said, I really don't care if they up the minimum wage, hell, raise it to about $25 per hour.  I just don't want you *****ing when small businesses and companies make drastic staffing cuts or relocate to compensate, and the unemployment stats skyrocket and our GDP takes a hit...

No other country provides you with the opportunities available in the US.  Educate yourself, work hard and persist.

IP, I learned when I worked a strike for Cities Service Oil back in the 70's what raises in minimum wages and increased benefits at the lowest level is really all about. After talking with some of the old timers in management we realized that when the union struck for dental benefits and succeeded...everyone up the ladder got dental benefits! We suddenly realized we were working for the enemy! The upper management already had a sweet medical benefits package. They didn't want to have to pay for the middle level guys to get the same as they had. Otherwise, what good is it being superior?

To repeat, in my lifetime I have never seen the dire predictions you and Conan make ever come to pass from higher minimum wages. Its rhetoric.

[iplaw]

That's not what the statistics say:

Labor economists refer to the "elasticity" of demand for labor to describe the ratio of jobs gained or lost when wages change. Estimates of this "elasticity" vary, but the average estimate by labor economists is that for a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage, employment among those affected drops by 5 percent. If the minimum wage is increased from $5.15 to $6.65 per hour, demand for unskilled labor could drop by as much as 15 percent in jobs that earn the minimum wage, resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs and making it more difficult for poor families to take this escape route out of poverty. -- Victor Fuchs, Alan Krueger, and James Poterba,"Economists' Views About Parameters, Values, and Policies: Survey Results in Labor and Public Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 36, (September 1998) pp 1387-1425.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

That's not what the statistics say:

Labor economists refer to the "elasticity" of demand for labor to describe the ratio of jobs gained or lost when wages change. Estimates of this "elasticity" vary, but the average estimate by labor economists is that for a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage, employment among those affected drops by 5 percent. If the minimum wage is increased from $5.15 to $6.65 per hour, demand for unskilled labor could drop by as much as 15 percent in jobs that earn the minimum wage, resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs and making it more difficult for poor families to take this escape route out of poverty. -- Victor Fuchs, Alan Krueger, and James Poterba,"Economists' Views About Parameters, Values, and Policies: Survey Results in Labor and Public Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 36, (September 1998) pp 1387-1425.

Those are not historical. They are estimates, predictions...guesses. Can you really see a loss of jobs in this sector after looking at the Sunday classifieds? Who will do the work? That implies that an employer will just throw up his hands and say, "In spite of demand for my product, and the fact that I cannot find anyone but illegals to do this work, I cannot afford to pay $2 more for this work than I did in 1996. Better close up shop and sell cars."?

[cannon_fodder]

1. Hometown:
a) Thanks for reading my WHOLE POST and not just the headline.  Contrary to your accusation, I specifically said that I had sympathy for and want to see aid given to people who are "unlucky" or failed for whatever reason.  I do not want to be forced to give aid, nor do I want to see that aid given without questions asked.  If so, I demand my share.

b) Please take a lesson or two in economics.  4% unemployment is considered at or near FULL EMPLOYMENT.  Between people entering and exiting the workforce, people getting fired, people quiting, and layoffs... 4% unemployment is about as low as it is EVER going to get.  In fact, anything less than 5-6% unemployment is considered bad for economic growth.  Who is going to open a new manufacturing plant and try to hire hundred of people if everyone already has a job?

c) The current economy is extremely robust. Both locally, nationally, and globally.  Wages are a cyclical affair, with industry and workers alternating control.  Industry has the upper hand at the moment because of the lien times in the early 2000's, expect workers to gain the upper hand soon as unemployment is low and profits are high.

d) Im tired of hearing the Myth of shifting tax burdens.  The chart below very clearly indicates the reverse is true, in fact the top 20% of wage earners pay nearly 80% of the tax.  40% of our country pays NOTHING in federal tax.  New Slogan: No representation without taxation.

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm

2)  Why are people panhandlnig more now than before.  I blame a complete lack of self respect.  Some people want to look like crap, shun education, and dont think twice about taking handouts from the government or anyone else.  In some circles people still try to avoid such things.

3) Raising the minimum wage is a joke.

Currently, a state can raise the wage if it so chooses.  But it has never had a realized effect on any standard of living.  

First of all, no one makes minimum wage.  If you do, its because you either have nothing to sell or you arent a good employee.  Sorry, but that's the truth.  A high school dropout that hasn't held a job for more than 6 months in a row... has nothing to sell.  Why should an employer buy it?  It is, after all, a labor market.  There are some people who simply lack work experience and have to start somewhere and will work their way up, so thank god their are jobs out there that dont cost the employer much so they can give new workers a chance.

Not to mention the cost of everything will go up accordingly OR the numbers employed will go down.  Do you honestly think the evil corporations will just eat the extra wage expense or will they pass it on to everyone?  If you really want to see the order taker at McDonalds get ahead, tip him a couple bucks next time you drive thru.

Speaking of McDonalds.  The vast majority of Americans got a start to their working careers at minimum wage.  Companies can hire workers with little expense and watch them leave or turn out to be crap.  Other markets, where hiring and firing is banned and wages are artificially inflated, do not provide this advantage.  Most young workers graduate high school and go on to unemployment.  They dont even have the basic job skills learned at a minimum wage job (proving you can show up on time, that you will work for 8 hours, that you can answer to authority, etc.).  Thus, many socialist paradises have unemployment rates for youth approaching 33%.  Personally, high school kids get in enough trouble as it is.  I prefer them giving me poor service at McDonald's than hanging around my house from 3:00 until I get home from work. There is a proven correlation between unemployed youth and crime.

Just another example of an over powered government trying to tell people what to do.  The net effects will be next to nothing nationwide.  The only states that will have an impact will be the poor states (like Oklahoma).

[Swimdog92]

I agree with Wilbur - 99.9% of the bums are scamming you for money to buy crack or liquor.

For those of you spotting the bums at 71st and Hwy 169, they all live in a open-air shack in the woods, just southeast of the Staples.  Take a trek back there and you'll see an ocean of discarded liquor containers, beer cans.  Be careful of the outdoor loo, as it's not marked. A well-worn trail leads from the shack back to the intersection.

The bums spotted at 51st and Peoria or Skelly and Lewis most often stay in a wooded patch behind the mexican restaurant at 51st and Lewis. With a liquor store in walking distance, why leave?

The people you see begging have been doing so for years, often at the same exact location.  I watched in horror one day as a motorist stopped for a panhandler and handed him a grocery sack with a fresh-cooked chicken and a liter of soda. A very nice gesture on the motorists part, however, would this motorist have done the same thing if instead of a bum at that intersection, there was a man digging a ditch to support his family?  Most likely not.  But whose behavior are we rewarding?  The hard-worker or the panhandler?

By giving panhandlers money, you only encourage them to stay.  That means for years. And before you do give them money, ask yourself, "would I want them panhandling in front of my house?"

If the answer is yes, then by all means take them with you!

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder


d) Im tired of hearing the Myth of shifting tax burdens.  The chart below very clearly indicates the reverse is true, in fact the top 20% of wage earners pay nearly 80% of the tax.  40% of our country pays NOTHING in federal tax.  New Slogan: No representation without taxation.

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm

Hey, Cannon, why does your chart quit in 1995?  What do you suppose has happened since then? What about the Bush tax cuts? Tell us about that, please...or should I?

/Kinda adds a new layer of meaning to the thread title, don't it?

[si_uk_lon_ok]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder


d) Im tired of hearing the Myth of shifting tax burdens.  The chart below very clearly indicates the reverse is true, in fact the top 20% of wage earners pay nearly 80% of the tax.  40% of our country pays NOTHING in federal tax.  New Slogan: No representation without taxation.

http://www.allegromedia.com/sugi/taxes/#Head-1.htm

Hey, Cannon, why does your chart quit in 1995?  What do you suppose has happened since then? What about the Bush tax cuts? Tell us about that, please...or should I?

/Kinda adds a new layer of meaning to the thread title, don't it?

The reason the graph shows that information is not that the rich have any higher tax rate, but the average family income in dollars at 1995 rates had fallen for the bottom three quintiles, held steadily for the fourth and grown rapidly for the highest.

Family Income and Tax Burden Data

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little
Hey, Cannon, why does your chart quit in 1995?  What do you suppose has happened since then? What about the Bush tax cuts? Tell us about that, please...or should I?

/Kinda adds a new layer of meaning to the thread title, don't it?

I don't want to hear it unless you have some actual statistics to back it up.

[Chicken Little]

I have a feeling you wouldn't want to hear if even if I did provide statistics.[]

Here ya go:

Study:  Bush Tax Cuts Favor Wealthy (2004)

quote:People in the top 20 percent of incomes, averaging $182,700 a year, saw their share of federal taxes decline from 65.3 percent of total payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year, according to the study by congressional budget analysts.

In contrast, middle-class taxpayers — with incomes ranging from $51,500 to $75,600 — bear a greater tax burden. Those making an average of $75,600 had the biggest jump in their share of taxes, from 18.5 percent of all payments in 2001 to 19.5 percent this year.  

Canon Fodder said, "...the top 20% of wage earners pay nearly 80% of the tax".  Nuh-uh.  They pay far less than that...63.5%. And that's down from 2001; so much for your trend.

Here's the real craw-sticker:

quote: The study found that the effective tax rate for the top 1 percent of taxpayers dropped from 33 percent in 2001 to 26.7 percent this year, a decline of 19 percent.

[sauerkraut]

Back to the car battery- There's more to a car battery than just price and CCA. The better batteries have better plates inside them and more plates inside them, that is where the electric juice is made.

[iplaw]

The study, requested by congressional Democrats in May, quickly provided fodder for the presidential campaign over the fairness of more than $1 trillion in tax cuts Mr. Bush has pushed through Congress since taking office.


Ouch!  Hate to be a party pooper here, but I might be looking for something that's a bit less partisan...would you let me post a report requested by the republicans?  


Here is a raw numbers feed from NTU.  The top 1% are actually paying more percentage wise since Bush took office and the bottom 50% are paying less...

[Chicken Little]

Awww, gimme a break.  The NTU is a bunch of flat tax, taxpayer bill of rights, wingers founded by James Dale Davidson (Newsmax, Whitewater, Troopergate, Vince Foster).  That's partisan, pally.[xx(]

The Congressional Budget Office is a federal agency within a then-Republican Congress.