Income Inequality?

[Cow Poke]

The issue is it looks like something fishy is going on. Your example is either unrealistic or someone is scamming someone else.

Fishy? Do you actually KNOW any poor people? I work with them all the time -- MANY of them work whatever job is available, and sometimes it's because they have a criminal record, or they don't have a car to drive further than a local store or shop --- not everybody is motivated to "climb the ladder".

I admit it's a weak area for me, but my knowledge of a subject has no impact on the validity of my arguments. They should stand or fall based on their own merit.

Yeah, your ignorance of the actual facts has no bearing...

I think I'm done with you --- you're playing games with numbers, not having a CLUE how they play into the real lives of poor people.

[Cow Poke]

Or because I'm right.

Yeah... that's it ... I'm done with you.

[Sparko]

we've given the hamburger flipper a raise at various times in history (seen, again, on the chart) and that has not caused a increase in the price of hamburgers.

Really? So I can buy a big mac for the same price I paid 20 years ago?

[seer]

Really? So I can buy a big mac for the same price I paid 20 years ago?

In 1965 a McDonald's hamburger was 15 cents.

[Sparko]

I was thinking healthcare, not cable TV.



The cost of grocery staples can have a net increase. Unless you can give me evidence that a higher minimum wage would raise the price of most goods more than say, ~10c, I can't accept your argument that the higher cost warrants forbidding a higher minimum wage.

I am pretty sure you "can't" accept my argument no matter what I say. Or rather "won't" accept it. Not because I am wrong, but because you refuse to educate yourself on basic economics. You think labor is somehow a free cost to making goods, and raising labor costs does nothing to the cost of production. That is just pure ignorance on your part.

[Bill the Cat]

Really? So I can buy a big mac for the same price I paid 20 years ago?

The price of a Big Mac, for instance, has risen faster than the official rise in consumer prices and has been doing so since the late '90s. In 1998, the average price of a Big Mac was about $2.50. Today, the average Big Mac is $4.56. If we were using the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the price of a Big Mac today should be about $3.40.



http://www.dunnwarren.com/inflation-disparity

[Sparko]

Okay...



I can't accept the question because I don't understand it. Why would Homer not want to be paid more?

It is not what Homer wants but what he is willing to take. I am sure Homer, like everyone else would probably want a few million dollars per year. But he is able and willing to work for $6/hour.

[fm93]

Because you don't understand real life economics.

You have NO CLUE about how poor people operate.

Excuse me, but isn't the point of discussions like these to help people understand and give them (more than) a clue? What good do you accomplish by merely telling him that he's ignorant and doesn't understand things rather than informing and educating?

[Sparko]

Excuse me, but isn't the point of discussions like these to help people understand and give them (more than) a clue? What good do you accomplish by merely telling him that he's ignorant and doesn't understand things rather than informing and educating?

when you try to explain things over and over and someone refuses to understand, or just can't get it, then you..

oh wait, I am talking to square_peg.. never mind.

[fm93]

when you try to explain things over and over and someone refuses to understand, or just can't get it, then you..

oh wait, I am talking to square_peg.. never mind.

But...you are the one who often seemingly refuses to understand. (Do I need to provide the countless examples of how you kept misrepresenting me and failing to grasp the basic concepts in the White Privilege thread?) I'm the one in this thread ASKING Cow Poke to clarify things SO THAT Psychic Missile and I and other readers can understand. I'm doing literally the exact OPPOSITE of "refusing to understand."

You can't even attack someone's character without misrepresenting the situation.

[Cow Poke]

Excuse me, but isn't the point of discussions like these to help people understand and give them (more than) a clue?

Well, yeah, but they gotta do their part.

What good do you accomplish by merely telling him that he's ignorant and doesn't understand things rather than informing and educating?

There comes a point at which somebody is so determined to hang onto their own ignorance that it's pointless to push further.

[Sparko]

But...you are the one who often seemingly refuses to understand. (Do I need to provide the countless examples of how you kept misrepresenting me and failing to grasp the basic concepts in the White Privilege thread?) I'm the one in this thread ASKING Cow Poke to clarify things SO THAT Psychic Missile and I and other readers can understand. I'm doing literally the exact OPPOSITE of "refusing to understand."

You can't even attack someone's character without misrepresenting the situation.

I have learned my lesson with you. You are invincibly ignorant and proud of it. You also like to argue one thing, then later claim that is not what you meant at all. You are the quintessential troll who wants his cake and eat it too. The Artful Dodger. A complete and utter waste of time.

[fm93]

Well, yeah, but they gotta do their part.

I can't speak for Psychic Missile, but I'm reading this thread as a neutral observer who doesn't have an opinion either way on the minimum wage issue and am trying to learn more about it. There were several points of your discussion that were ignored or cut off needlessly, I think. It looked like you were carrying out a thought experiment based on the question of whether junk foods or healthy organic foods cost more. While his answer involved a caveat, he ultimately did provide a solid, firm answer. But you ignored that, focused solely on the caveat ("depending on the location") and dropped that discussion point right there. Now I don't know where you were trying to go with it. You also didn't answer his claim that some poor people operate according to an informal mental budget. I don't have much experience interacting directly with poor people (other than passing some beggars on some streets), but I always thought they do precisely that with what little money they have--it seems that it'd be even more of a necessity for them, in fact. At the very least, that point of discussion could've used some clarification.

There comes a point at which somebody is so determined to hang onto their own ignorance that it's pointless to push further.

Sure, but it didn't seem to me that he'd reached that point. He seemed to be politely addressing your questions, admitting that he didn't understand some parts and asking his own questions, etc.

[Sparko]

I can't speak for Psychic Missile, but I'm reading this thread as a neutral observer who doesn't have an opinion either way on the minimum wage issue and am trying to learn more about it. There were several points of your discussion that were ignored or cut off needlessly, I think. It looked like you were carrying out a thought experiment based on the question of whether junk foods or healthy organic foods cost more. While his answer involved a caveat, he ultimately did provide a solid, firm answer. But you ignored that, focused solely on the caveat ("depending on the location") and dropped that discussion point right there. Now I don't know where you were trying to go with it. You also didn't answer his claim that some poor people operate according to an informal mental budget. I don't have much experience interacting directly with poor people (other than passing some beggars on some streets), but I always thought they do precisely that with what little money they have--it seems that it'd be even more of a necessity for them, in fact. At the very least, that point of discussion could've used some clarification.


Sure, but it didn't seem to me that he'd reached that point. He seemed to be politely addressing your questions, admitting that he didn't understand some parts and asking his own questions, etc.

dangle that hook and twitch it ever so slightly.... get a nibble and reel them back in.

[Psychic Missile]

I am pretty sure you "can't" accept my argument no matter what I say. Or rather "won't" accept it. Not because I am wrong, but because you refuse to educate yourself on basic economics. You think labor is somehow a free cost to making goods, and raising labor costs does nothing to the cost of production. That is just pure ignorance on your part.

You are misstating my position. Do you not see a discrepancy between what you said and what I said: "I do not think an increased labor cost, which makes up a negligible amount of the cost of a good compared to materials, would drive up the price of goods to the point where it cancels itself out"? Your intellectual dishonesty is quite distressing. I am still waiting on evidence that a higher minimum wage would be cancelled out by a higher cost of goods. I won't accept arguments that have no evidence or are not based on solid reasoning.

It is not what Homer wants but what he is willing to take. I am sure Homer, like everyone else would probably want a few million dollars per year. But he is able and willing to work for $6/hour.

So why would he not be happy if he was being payed more than his bottom line?