Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Minimum Wage Protests Break Out In 270 Cities" video.

  1. +Adasha Stewart How much wealth you create. How rare your skill is. The responsibilities you do. There are several factors. Anyone can pick up trash. If no one does it, or it becomes too expensive the people will find other methods to do it. Few can do what a CEO does.
    2
  2. I sometimes hope for a $15/hr min. wage. Because if it gets that high it will be funny seeing all those jobs go bye-bye. Then it will be funny seeing them complain about not having enough welfare.
    2
  3. +Alan S How do you figure? Because when I do the math with the CEOs of Walmart, if they were to earn zero the workers will earn and extra $148 a year.
    2
  4. +ManiManiPlays Seems about as logical as any other method politicians use.
    2
  5. +Afro Saxon Most are union leaders who use the min. wage to negotiate wages. So they won't lose their job.
    1
  6. +1 ebenezer They don't use robots because right now it is cheaper and easier to hire employees. Also there is an advantage of hiring workers because people still like dealing with a person. But if the worker becomes too expensive then companies will make the investment to automate.
    1
  7. +Belen Lazaro Actually during the entire video Kyle did not give one fact at all. He is comparing overall productivity to the min. wage. Just because overall productivity went up doesn't mean it went up for the min. wage worker. I wrote another comment on it. You can read it and try to debunk it if you like. But the pure fact is that Kyle did not list a single fact.
    1
  8. +Ylze Tyr I think you responded to the wrong person.
    1
  9. +Alan S It is the same for every CEO.
    1
  10. +Alan S I know hat all CEOs don't earn the same. My point is that if you lower CEO pay it won't do anything to raise the wages of the workers.
    1
  11. +Basil Lykov Make you run a business. That will change your opinion on the min. wage.
    1
  12. +dipojones If they wanted to pay less they would. In 1979 around 14% of workers were earning at or below the min. wage. Now it is around 5%. The pure fact is that businesses don't pay more because they are simply can't afford it. And the workers don't earn more because they simply are not worth it.
    1
  13. +Jester2b04 Look up Skilled Biased Technological Change and disposable income through the years.
    1
  14. +kristabella222 Those stats Kyle gave doesn't even tell the fraction of the truth. It is like liberals are allergic to facts.
    1
  15. +Ylze Tyr Seriously, have you finished you homework assignment yet?
    1
  16. +Ylze Tyr It is not a dodge, it is showing that I am done with you. I can throw you in a pile of snow to show to you that is cold and you will still deny it. I bet you support all the "facts" that Kyle mentioned. Guess what, he doesn't cite anything on where he got his numbers. But you have no problem supporting what he says.
    1
  17. +Ylze Tyr No, you are selective in what you want to hear. Justify this if you think you have done the research. How can you compare overall productivity to the min. wage?
    1
  18. +Ylze Tyr So all the productivity gain was from minimum wage workers? Because that is what you are implying. Also wages have gone up in that 1. Those who invested in technology and those or create the technology have seen their wages go up. It is called Skilled Biased Technological Change. 2. Disposable income is up and has increased steadily for a while now. So back to the original question at hand. How can you compare overall productivity to just the min. wage? I will be more clear. What I am getting at is that by comparing the min. wage to productivity you are saying that all the productivity increase is purely from the min. wage jobs. How can you say that?
    1
  19. +Ylze Tyr "how about you give a single fact to back up even one of your arguments against a min wage? just one. and remember, the opinion of another right wing extremist moron is not a fact," 1. I gave you research from a professor who cited publications 2. You are willing to accept Kyle's "facts" when he is a radical liberal......so how can you justify that?
    1
  20. +Ylze Tyr So you are not implying that. Then you realize that the average hourly earnings in the US is around $24/hr which matches overall productivity. Because overall productivity is up along with earnings. As I said, look up Skilled Biased Technological Change. 1. I cited David Neumark from UC-Irvine. 2. Kyle is not moderate. He never looked at opposing studies when several exist. He says there is no argument against the min. wage when basic economics goes against it as I showed you in an introductory economics textbook. That is like saying there is no argument for state rights when there is sound theory for and against it. You disregard something so fundamental then you can't be considered anything more than a radical.
    1
  21. +Ylze Tyr Ok, the David Neumark cite http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/04/17/the-record-is-clear-minimum-wage-hikes-destroy-jobs/ http://wol.iza.org/articles/employment-effects-of-minimum-wages.pdf He is also cited several times in other min. wage study. In research that is a sign of respect. Yes, basic economics does show the inefficiencies of price control. Read any introduction to economics textbook. This is the problem, you have never even read an economics textbook. We can't even begin to get to opinions if you have not even read a textbook or taken a class on economics. A few other sources for you http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323468604578249723138161566 http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/capital-commerce/2007/09/20/the-myth-of-stagnant-wages http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1237097 https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/DSPIC96
    1
  22. +Ylze Tyr Facts are stubborn things, aren't they?
    1
  23. +BUDS: The Animated Series You could stay at home and they will lose their job. I hardly eat out anymore because I get bad service. I am not picky as well. When I order something I ask for it as it and take of the things I don't like myself (like tomatoes). If the min. wage goes up which increases the price of the good (or lowers the portions) I won't go out at all along with many others. Thus several will lose their jobs. Ylze Tyr is a fool. I give him a lot of sources to look at, some by economists, and even tell him to read an introductory economics textbook. All the mean while he just yells and screams "you're stupid" or "your wrong". I dance circles around this guy while he sits there and cries. It is quite funny anymore. My feeling is at this point is that he earns around $9, maybe $10 per hour and the only way he can get a raise is by the min. wage increase (assuming he can keep a job). I also assume that he not only earns a low wage, he also works low hours. That is what it comes down to. But I should feel sorry for him a little, he can't even read an introductory economics textbook.
    1
  24. +Ylze Tyr " and i'll remind you once again that a few states and cities have raised their min wages already and are seeing NONE of the negative effects you claim will happen and are seeing MANY positive effects" And I'll remind you once again that there are several factors that are involved in jobs and employment beyond the min. wage. All the negative effects get lost in the statistical noise. When you remove that noise you see it such as Washington having a high min. wage and high teenage unemployment. And this goes back to if it has positive effects (which you never mention one) then why not $50/hr? Once again pure statistical analysis proves you wrong. But this is a 300 level college course. I can understand you not being able to comprehend that considering you can't even read a textbook from a 100 level course.
    1
  25. +Ylze Tyr "and you AGAIN dodged why you think min wage workers have absolutely nothing to do with productivity." I didn't dodge it, I gave you numbers from the BLS that showed that over 18 years their productivity went up around half of a percent. "and you also dodged your hypocrisy of saying that Kyle is a radical for saying there's no argument against the min wage when you say there is no argument FOR a min wage, making you just as radical as you accuse him of being." I say what I say because I have heard all of the arguments and I can shoot them down. I at least can accept a min. wage at the state and local level.
    1
  26. +Ylze Tyr 1. No you didn't. The only source out there that moderates Neumark vs Card said there was no "discernible effect" on employment. That is because, as I said before, and so did Christina Romer, the min. wage is small compared to the overall economy and thus any negative effect gets lost in the statistical noise. It is similar to throwing an ice cube in a bath tub of hot water and claiming ice does not cool water. 2. You gave one source and then told me not to criticize it. So I am not allowed to criticize sources but you are? I gave you several, some that quoted economist. Some that broke down the statistics. I know that some things are hard for you to comprehend, but at times I don't think you even try. 3. I admit it wasn't the best source, but still better then what you provided. 4. So when you see a graph of disposable income you cry foul and say it has no context? But you can mention overall productivity and say it is all right even though you gave no context? I told you overall productivity is going up. I showed you BLS numbers that showed that not every job saw their productivity go up at the same rate. I told you about Skilled Biased Technological Change. I took you productivity argument and broke it down. But when I show you data of disposable income you say " the fourth link shows that disposable income has increased but again, gives no context whatsoever; it doesn't compare it to anything else like the rate of increased productivity. " That is it. What it shows is something I have been saying a long time. Increase productivity means more goods and services that are better and cheaper. It means that while people are supposedly earning the same or less according to you, they are getting more bang for their buck. So much so that they have more left over. You criticized me for cherry picking when you 1. Showed compensation without any context 2. Said areas that raised the min. wage saw job growth as if they are directly related with no other variables 3. Looked at overall productivity and felt that the min. wage jobs contributed in a large way You really need to do a lot more research. Facts are stubborn things.
    1
  27. +Mike Congardi The term living wage is subjective and doesn't mean anything.
    1
  28. +Mike Congardi The term living wage is subjective and doesn't mean anything.
    1
  29. +Mike Congardi The minimum wage is a price floor where the government sets some arbitrary price on a resource in the market, in this case that is labor.
    1
  30. +Ylze Tyr And yet the MIT calculator is not cited in any peer reviewed journal. The term "living wage" is subjective. Even the MIT calculator does not describe their results or standards. What standards are the based off of? Explain that to me. Unless you have a standard set to that definition then it is not a definition and thus is subjective. Ignoring facts doesn't make them go away.
    1
  31. +Mike Congardi There is no standard to the "living wage" which is why it can't be used in any policy. And since there is no standard there is no definition. What is the standard? A single person living in a one bedroom apartment? Or 6 people living in a one bedroom apartment? A co-worker of mine was telling me about when they went to college they he lived in a one bedroom with with 11 other guys. I have a friend who lived in a studio with 2 other guys. Does owning a car come into the equation? How much gas? Some people can walk to work. I do. I have heard some people mention recreational time. My hobby actually earns me money. So is my "living wage" now lower? That is the problem. When asked to get into details on the term "living wage" those that support it can't.
    1
  32. +Ylze Tyr I doubt you do
    1
  33. +Ylze Tyr I have seen that. Their standards are very broad. Take housing for example. They make the assumption that someone will live on their own as a single individual. Or if 2 adults are living together they are living in a 2 bedroom. It is questionable standards as is. I pay $560/month for a bedroom. Say 4 people lived there, that is $140/month. Their food is at 300/month for an adult. I pay $150, but let us say $200. Now if they live close to work travel is no $0. I will keep the $192/month for healthcare. Same for $190 for other which is a vague category but whatever. So that is $722/month. Divided by 160 is $4.50/hr. So the living wage by the realistic standards I set is that. And I can go even lower. You see, that is the difference between you and me, I can take something and break it down. That is why I am a well educated person with skills where you are hoping for a min. wage increase because that is the only chance you will ever have in getting a raise.
    1
  34. +Ylze Tyr Also, in what peer reviewed journal has the "living wage calculator" ever been published? Right now I see none. The reason why is because economist will do exactly what I just did, break it down to where it wont' mean anything. Believe me, I have submitted papers to be reviewed and published in peer reviewed journals. The scrutiny is high. Something you wont' experience in your min. wage job. Sorry facts hurt you. Believe me, study like I did and then maybe you can be intelligent.
    1
  35. +Ylze Tyr Even with that it still doesn't counter any point about how the min. wage does nothing to grow the economy and if anything it kills jobs and raise prices.
    1
  36. +Ylze Tyr https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/microeconomics/consumer-producer-surplus/deadweight-loss-tutorial/v/minimum-wage-and-price-floors Let us start with the basics. The guy who created this has 4 degrees from MIT and an MBA from Harvard. But I bet you feel he is an idiot.
    1
  37. +Ylze Tyr Actually they don't consider many different types of living arrangement. You can't even read your own source. And I have prove any of those things happening. You have yet to prove the min. wage leads to economic growth
    1
  38. +Ylze Tyr No it doesn't. I am talking about 4 adults living in a one bedroom. That happens. A co-worker of mine was talking about him living with 11 other guys in a 2 bedroom in southern california. He is an engineer now. It can be done. But as usual you can't look at situations like that. You have to be spoon fed everything because you are not intelligent enough to think for yourself. That is why you support a higher min. wage, it gives you a raise you can't earn yourself. Yes I have shown you peer reviewed articles that show the negative effects of the min. wage. I even shown you the theory on how setting a price floor won't have negative effects and I quoted Paul Krugman's textbook. You have yet to show me anything that shows the min. wage led to economic growth. At this point I have shown that the min. wage either leads to negative effects or no effect at all. You have shown zero positive effect.
    1
  39. +Ylze Tyr I talked about realistic situation that do happen and are more common than you think. People on the left like to bring up the single mom with three kids, but I bet you won't call that extreme. Even at that the "living wage calculator" isn't about the pros and cons of the min. wage. It is simply a calculation of what someone has to earn to make a living in certain situations. So in all you haven't proven anything. In the end the living wage is subjective. I ran through the numbers and shown that someone can live off of $4.50/hr. I am sorry that you can't do simple math but the numbers don't lie. And when did you show any positive effects? You just went with some talking points with no data. I shown you data on jobs being lost. I gave you an explanation on why jobs are not lost. You saying "higher employee morale, less turnover, it's been shown to have positive effects on pay equality for minorities and women, etc. etc. etc." are all talking points that I debunked. Businesses know that if they pay more there will be less job turnover and higher morale, the fact is that they simply can't afford it. And now you are bringing up minorities and women? I thought this was supposed to benefit all? Even at that you did not show one thing that showed economic growth happened due to the min. wage.
    1
  40. +kristabella222 I based that $4.50 off of the cost of living in my city. If you have four adults living in a one bedroom apartment, all splitting rent and utilities evenly, and paying for their own healthcare, and gas (if they even drive), and food, then you have $4.50. And 4 people living together is not extreme. It happens. People go farther to save money. I knew of 3 guys in a studio. My co-worker while living in so cal going to college lived in a 2 bedroom with 11 other guys. That is why the "living wage" is subjective. What businesses are seeing huge profits? You might be able to point towards a few corporations (who have to keep shareholders happy mind you), but that is it. Even at that, if you were to look at Walmart, they are at 3--5% profit margins. Most businesses work off of very thin profit margins. They simply can't afford higher wages. On stagnate wages, you have to 1. Look up Skilled Biased Technological Change 2. Businesses pay more in healthcare benefits 3. Consider that for the past few decades women involvement in the workforce has increased 15% since the 70s, men has dropped around 10%. Men get paid more than women (another topic all together) 4. Productivity increase means more wealth and cheaper goods and services that are better. Consider that you smart phone has more computing power than what put a man on the moon in the late 60s. People have more wealth overall 5. Disposable income is 7 times higher than it was in the 70s. While people may seem to be earning the same wage, as a whole they are not. "When wages are higher people have more disposable income which stimulates the economy. " Stimulate what? Buying 2 dozen eggs instead of one for the month? That does not grow the economy. That is why there is not many, if any politician that supports raising the min. wage based off of growing the economy. Even Christina Romer said raising the min. wage will, at best grow the economy. 0.02%. Now this is not to say that all has been good. I for one want to improve the situation as well. But to say it has all been bad, and to basically give out, at best deceptive information (and really wrong information in several ways) is not the solution to take. And with the min. wage, considering it has never been linked to any economic growth, but has been linked to job loss and price increases, it is not a route to take.
    1
  41. +Ylze Tyr It isn't a ridiculous argument, it is to show how the "living wage" is subjective. Let me put it in a different way. Say I, as a single guy with good health and willing to walk to save money worked at the same place as a single mom with 2 kids that has to commute 20 minutes a day after dropping off the kids to daycare. Should that girl get paid more than me? His "living wage" is now higher. But if he does get paid more than me, then what ever happen to equal pay for equal work? Discuss that scenario.
    1
  42. +Ylze Tyr Actually it isn't extreme, it is more common than you think. The average people per household in 2014 was 2.5. Source was Census.gov.
    1
  43. +Ylze Tyr "he" is a typo. I see that when you resort to that then I have the upper hand in the debate.
    1
  44. +Ylze Tyr As I can see I have the upper hand.
    1
  45. +Ylze Tyr I googled subjective, what is your point?
    1
  46. +Ylze Tyr http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subjective Seems like I am using it fine to me Here is an example sentence "a person's subjective perception of the world" A person subjective perception what a "living wage" is different. or "Law can be maddeningly subjective. So much is left up to your own interpretation." Like I just showed how the term "living wage" is subjective and can me up to someone's own interpretation. I know reading is hard for you, but I am hear to help.
    1
  47. +Ylze Tyr I get it, you struggle at math, science, reading comprehension, and economics.
    1
  48. +Ylze Tyr Really? This is like explaining why snow is cold. I Showed you how the "living wage" is open to interpretation. It depends on someone's living situation. I also love how you dodge the scenario I wanted you to discuss by simply pointing out a typo. But then you claim I am dodging?
    1
  49. +Ylze Tyr It is all about interpretation. I showed you how others can view the "living wage" to be lower. And you are dodging the scenario that I laid out to you.
    1
  50. +Ylze Tyr You refused to answer the question because at that point your rhetoric falls apart. Ok, so you say that single mom (or dad, as I said, it was typo, we are talking about a single mom here) will need a higher income to care for herself and her children where I don't. So based off of that, if that single mom of 2 and myself of no children worked the same job, does that mom deserve a higher wage? Please answer that. Ignore trying to explain me something, let us go back to the root of the issue. You say that people deserve a "living wage". Ignore the meaning of that for now and consider the scenario I laid out. You and can both agree a single mom of 2 kids needs a higher income than me being single of no kids. Say we work the exact same job. Based off of her living conditions does she deserve a higher wage? Answer that.
    1
  51. +Ylze Tyr No, the root of the argument is that you want to raise the min. wage. Based off of what? If you want to say people deserve a "living wage" as an argument to raise the min. wage then you are saying that mom deserves a higher wage than me despite doing more work. If not then it doesn't matter what you or I feel what the "living wage" is. We can argue until the cows come home, it doesn't solve the root of the issue. Why even have a min. wage? Explain that. Start with that because now I just got you to admit it has nothing to do with a "living wage".
    1
  52. +Ylze Tyr I haven't been proven wrong. I laid out how the "living wage" is subjective. Even at that it should be called a "living income". What I am doing is going back to the root of the issue. You are in support of a living wage, you feel people deserve a living wage. I just showed that if you do support that then you don't support equal pay for equal work. Maybe you support the min. wage for something else? Then that comes back to why not $50/hr? You see all of your arguments you can't support. I have been easy on you but now I am breaking out the big guns, that is asking questions. They best way to win an argument against a liberal is to ask them questions to get into specifics. I am doing that with you and it shows that you are either contradicting yourself or can't get into details on anything. Now we are at the point where you are just dodging the question and jumping up and down in anger.
    1