Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Trump's Labor Secretary Pick Is Anti-Labor" video.

  1. It gives the highest number when you account for inflation. It is cherry picked and anyone who uses that number is trying to pull wool over your eyes.
    3
  2. To add, Kyle tries to use the productivity argument. He is comparing overall productivity to the least productive workers in the market. Just because overall productivity has gone up does not mean the least productive worker has. They are the minimum for a reason. Productivity is up because of technology and people developing more productive skill, it is called Skilled Biased Technological Change. Consider this very simple example. You have Fred and Ed. Fred produces $3/hr and Ed produces $3/hr. That is $6/hr total and is split between them. Now 20 years later Ed gets a degree and produces $31/hr and Fred decides to stick to his jobs and only moves up to $5/hr. Between the two of them they produce $36/hr. Overall productivity has gone up. That is because Ed has become that much more productive to the market. Does that mean we raise Fred's wage? No. Now does that mean it is all bad for Fred? Not necessarily Ed's job could be making certain goods better and cheaper that Fred uses. For example, cars these days are cheaper, safer, get better mileage, and last longer. So the productivity argument is just as deceptive.
    3
  3. Ok, people have been bringing up Idiocracy. I don't agree with their analogy but I will say one of the Secretary of State did use Carl Jr. as a sponsor. Just a little joke for regressive liberals to run with.
    2
  4. C Wilson, you are so concern about grammar that you must have failed economics.
    2
  5. C Wilson Funny, I am getting my PhD.
    2
  6. I support these picks if it does pretty much eliminate these federal programs. They don't help anyone. All they do is create waste and add layers of bureaucracy.
    2
  7. "This might sound evil but if you can't afford to pay your employees a liveable income then your buisness deserves to fail." If you can't justify earning a higher wage as a person then you deserve to fail. There, I corrected that for you.
    1
  8. Darin, there is no such thing as a "living wage" as it is subjective. You are paid the market rate. How you make a living is up to you.
    1
  9. Jordan, Card's and Kreugar's paper have been challenged in the past and have shown to have flaws. Seattle is struggling in some ways due to the min. wage increase. You have to understand that there is also more to it than what you are thinking. Emeryville, CA has the highest min. wage in the country and is fine. Their two biggest employers are Pixar and a pharmaceutical research company who both pay very high salaries. Now compare that to where I live where our biggest employer is the school district. Emeryville generates a lot of revenue for the city. My city does not. A higher min. wage will hurt us. A higher min. wage, especially at $15/hr will kill small towns who generate very little.
    1
  10. ***** Define a "livable income".
    1
  11. ***** You are making the false assumption that people on min. wage are working full time and are the primary (or only) earner of a household.  Also, that "average" seems high.  I earn around $23,000 a year and I am fine.
    1
  12. ***** And those single parent households are the extreme minority. I am not denying their existence.  I am saying that raising the min. wage will not do them any good.  If it did then at what cost?  Other people losing jobs and hindering their life?  You can't help everyone.  I met people in dire situations and you have to turn a blind eye to it. It is sad but that's life.  You can't hold society back for the select few. Poverty is a problem, but consider this, before the war on poverty poverty was dropping. Since then it has remained stagnate.
    1
  13. Darin Brown My university pays me as a TA.   
    1
  14. Darin Brown I am back.
    1
  15. Darin Brown You seem to be bitching a lot for being an educated man.
    1
  16. Darin Brown Physical Chemistry and I am also getting my MBA.
    1
  17. TheUltimateBeing01 I do study a lot of biophysics.  But I am a physicists that decided to study physical chemistry. Basically I apply a lot of physics to the understanding of biological materials. 
    1
  18. When someone takes a paid sick leave someone else has to pick up the slack. What you are promoting is laziness and lack of production. Several people have paid sick leave already through their job, but they earned it. Just giving it away will reduce production.
    1
  19. ladyunicornejg Like what?  The US is in the top 5 in the world in productivity.  Even at that the majority already have paid sick leave. Those that don't are low skilled workers who are paid little and part time workers with flexible scheduling.  
    1
  20. ladyunicornejg Part time workers have flexible scheduling and are usually temporary.  That is why they are part time.  It leads to laziness because people will take advantage of it.  I hardly take days off and I am earning my doctorate.  Successful people hardly take days off.  The problem it will lead is that you will have a group of people taking days off and then complaining when someone is more successful than them.  
    1
  21. ladyunicornejg Basically, it creates more class warfare like our other social programs do.  
    1
  22. ladyunicornejg I find it funny how you say to provide evidence when you provide none yourself.  We have increase spending in social programs for years and look at what it has created.  It has created a group of people who feel entitled and another who actually work and have become successful.  Those who are entitled are jealous of those who are successful and feel the need to attack them.  This country almost elected a socialist.  That is a problem.  
    1
  23. ladyunicornejg Bernie was a socialist. Just because you put the work "democracy" in front  of it does not make it any different.  I guess Trump supports Capitalist Democracy. We do need to change things.  That means less federal government involvement, not more.  Most of our problems stem from the federal government.  Finland and Denmark have small populations, smaller than a lot of our states. That is a prime example of how smaller, more local government can work better at times.  Even at that, they are not what you think they are.  Bernie was proposing things that none of those countries do.  Also, they don't have any min. wage.  
    1
  24. ladyunicornejg It is the same as socialism.  Even at that Bernie does no support what Finland and Denmark has. " Automation and global economics will continue to chip away at labor until eventually practicaly no workers are needed. " And that is bad why?  In reality there are plenty of jobs, they just require skills.
    1
  25. ladyunicornejg Seems like the min. wage has just killed some of your jobs.  
    1
  26. ladyunicornejg" Minimum wage removal only postpones automation job loss it doesn't prevent it" I agree, postponing it will allow people to develop skills.
    1
  27. ladyunicornejg And the local government can handle those people if necessary.  
    1
  28. ladyunicornejg Why do you think not all will? 
    1
  29. ladyunicornejg In a lot of places charities is enough.  It goes back to some areas don't need a lot of government.  
    1
  30. ladyunicornejg How do you care for all people?  Define that.  And should it come at the expense of others?   
    1
  31. ladyunicornejg I agree, nothing is self sufficient. Do you want things to be done by force though? 
    1
  32. I am earning my PhD in physical chemistry. I support a lot of libertarian ideas. So do several of my friends. I used to lean liberal in my younger days and then I became an adult. You call libertarians children, and there are some that are ignorant I would agree. But I bet it has to do more with the fact you are myopic and can't see past your own views.
    1
  33. Usamljeny Nitko We probably agree on a lot if you consider yourself a libertarian in some ways.  The fact is that there are several liberals who are children to me.  There is a reason why the young typically vote for democrats. 
    1
  34. enginesnblades You are talking about the extreme viewpoint of libertarianism where very few even feel that way.  No government is just as bad as too much government. What most libertarians support is what I support and that is smaller, more local government.  Living within the confines of the constitution.  There are extremists in all parties. 
    1
  35. enginesnblades I feel that most of the programs we have at the federal level are unconstitutional and should be ran at the state level.  With social safety nets, for example, I say get rid of them at the federal level and let the states decide.  
    1
  36. enginesnblades "The problem with that is that there are many states that won't fund the programs." One, why not? Every state provides K-12 education.  Also, do we even need them?  If that state does not want them that is up to them and their citizens who live there, vote, and pay taxes there. "As it is already a lot of deep red states require extraneous amounts of welfare funds from the federal government" As farm subsidizes, not welfare. " If someone is so poor they need welfare, or social security they definitely don't have enough money to just up and move to another state" And that is their problem.  Why should others suffer for someone's problem? " As great and merry as these types of libertarian ideas sound it really only takes a minute of thought and research to see they wont work" Not really.  As you said, people are living paycheck by paycheck. Meanwhile the federal government continues to grow. There is a correlation there.
    1
  37. enginesnblades "It would be painfully easy to take care of everyone," How? Take healthcare for example.  We lack doctors, nurses, pharmacists, researcher. Take college for example, we lack TAs, professors, tutors etc. We lack skilled workers in those fields.  How do we provide for people when we lack skilled workers? Also, 90% of the jobs are not on the chopping block.
    1
  38. Genovacide, liberals rather have people work government jobs.
    1
  39. True. As a graduate student it is harder to my colleagues getting their doctorate to get a Post-Doc because the pay for that job has been doubled.
    1
  40. C Wilson, you will be waiting in line longer for a hamburger due to less workers and less stores.
    1
  41. C Wilson, they won't be able to put up another store because they won't be able afford to run one with the higher min. wage. I think you need to spend your money on some economic books.
    1
  42. C Wilson That price increase was gradual.  Also, every single min. wage increase has been minute compared to the entire complex economy.  It has been around 30%.  People are suggesting a $15/hr min. wage which will be a major increase and will have negative side effects that are noticeable at that point. What you also have to consider is that with the installment of the min. wage certain target groups have been harmed. Milton Friedman has said the most anti-negro law on the books was the min. wage because when it was established black teen unemployment went up.  They were priced out of the job market.  Some other things that happened is that stores found ways to save without raising prices.  That would be cutting hours and cutting workers.  When broken down there is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage.  In the end you are enforcing how much is paid per hour, not per week. 
    1
  43. C Wilson When did I misspell grammar?  Oh, and by the way.  Your attitude is the reason why Trump won.  Enjoy 4 years of Trump.
    1
  44. C Wilson Fair enough.   
    1
  45. Kyle is a radical socialist. Anything that leans away from that he cries about.
    1
  46. ***** Nice response.
    1
  47. ModoConodo 200 All the time.
    1
  48. Doesn't work. What grows an economy is development of wealth, not giving money away.
    1
  49. Technology has always replaced jobs. The key thing is that if we leave the market alone then the change is gradual allowing people to develop new skills to work the new jobs that are developed. As is with high taxes and regulations the change is occurring faster screwing people over. With the Carrier deal, people are saying those jobs will leave in the end. Maybe. But right now they are hear and people need to start developing skills to not rely on archaic jobs like that.
    1
  50. Gautier Blandin There will be other low paying jobs, they will just be in other areas of the market.  At universities there are several students being paid as tutors and are paid min. wage.  There are some jobs that will not be replaced by automation such as sweeping sidewalks.  If we had not min. wage teens can get hired to do a minute task like that.  If technology was that advanced to where we had robot who can do that than people will be working very little and will be working jobs they fully enjoy.  That and cost of living will be way down. New technology will mean new jobs. People will just have to get trained to do them.  To me it lies in college.  As I said we have tutors at universities.  Also we have people who can manage the desk at the gym or the office at a department.  Undergraduate research is huge.   We have undergraduates in my lab and we give them a lot of work to do.  Now I am not one of those individuals who support "free college".  If we leave the market alone people will go to where the money and jobs are at.  When left along the change will be gradual and we will be fine.
    1
  51. Gautier Blandin The free market will offer a lot of those things if we just leave it alone.  In reality the people who mainly work more than 40 hours a week do so because they enjoy their job.  The 40 hour work week is completely arbitrary along with 5 weeks vacation.  I could never imagine going on vacation that long as being away from work that long will not be enjoyable for me.  We need to push people to do stuff they enjoy doing. Not be miserable and expect the government to provide for them.
    1
  52. Rust R People abuse it now by buying out politicians. All a business can do is offer you a job and/or a product. Only government can force you do to things.  Regulations leads to either 1. corruption 2. lack of progress You add regulations do you think a business is going to pay?  No.  They will pass on the cost to the consumer and employees.
    1
  53. Gautier Blandin Not really.  Small companies can't afford automation as is.  Several companies have done away with minute tasks such as sweeping because the min. wage has made it too expensive to hire workers to do it.  And if we are in a position where technology is that advanced then we are fine as a society. "And why would you want to get teens to do it for less than the minimum wage ? The minimum wages exists because it's normal that when you work, you get paid a decent amount of money." Define "decent amount".  That is a very broad and subjective phrase.  Teens are just entering the job market and basically have no value.  When the min. wage goes up so does teenage unemployment.  I want them to get work experience to be more productive in the future. "The minimum wage is not even a living wage" Living wage is also a subjective and broad phrase that means nothing. "Not if you don't tax and regulate. If you DO NOT tax and regulate, what will happen is that people who OWN the robots will get richer and richer, because of capital gains being much higher than working class income." The only way the rich will get richer is if they sell a good/service to someone.  If people can't afford it they will have to lower the price.  Having all that production means nothing if they don't sell it.  In your productivity graph you will see that it started separate around the 70s.  What happened was that in the 60s the payroll tax was expanded.  So business instead paid through benefits instead of a higher wage because benefits were a 100% tax free way of paying people.  A higher wage meant higher taxes.  Therefore the payroll tax has hurt wage increases. So you have to be careful in analyzing that graph.  It is not as bad as you make it out to be. Nobody paid that high tax rate in the past.  That is why we had the tax reform bill of 1969.  In 1967 there were 155 Americans who earned over $200,000 that year who paid $0 in federal income taxes.  Also, even with the different tax rates our tax revenue, in terms of percent of GDP, has been around the same.  High tax rates don't tell the whole story.  Consider this, what is bigger?  50% of 100 or 10% of 1000?
    1
  54. Rust R Most prisons are ran by the state.  Did I say I want everything to be private? No.  I just want to limit the size of the federal government. 
    1
  55. Gautier Blandin And those regulations can be done at the state level. 
    1
  56. Gautier Blandin How would it cause problems for inner state trade?
    1
  57. Gautier Blandin Federal regulations just creates waste and bureaucracy along with special interest groups.
    1
  58. Gautier Blandin There is a lot you can learn at a job that you can't learn at schools. Teens will be working part time.  Also, when applying for scholarships that is one thing people look at, if you had a job.  It gives you experience in the workplace and how to work with others that are not your peers.   " Living wage is not subjective," Yes it is.  It depends on the situation you live in. "pay your food, pay your rent, pay your water and electricity bills, pay your healthcare, save for your retirement, pay transportation" What kind of food?  What kind of rent?  Your own single bedroom or a studio with two other people.  Water is free in a lot of places.  How much electricity?  I never run my AC because I live in a desert.  Why transportation?  I walk to work myself. "the internet, a computer, a phone, a car" Isn't a car transportation?
    1
  59. Gautier Blandin Most regulations are pretty equal.  Take driving laws for example.  You don't have a freeway speed limit of 40 mph in one state and 90 in another.  They are all around the same, from 55 mph to 80 mph.  It just all depends on the situation.  " some products that are legal in one state wouldn't be legal in the other," Like alcohol?  States set their own drinking and smoking laws.  Things seem to be doing fine. If a state makes something illegal they will be hurting their own economy......maybe.  It depends.  A one size fits all policy does not work.
    1
  60. Gautier Blandin "Also, state-by-state regulations would generate much more bureaucracy" Actually no because you can micromanage better there and have less politicians to deal with.  Also, at the state and local level people can see if the government is working for them.  If not they will get booted.  Not so much at the federal level.  Thus you have less corruption as well. If a state is really poor than people will move forcing that state to change or suffer.
    1
  61. You are going to the extreme here. No one supports that. The problem is that if you go to the extreme to the opposite end of the spectrum you get just as many, if not more problems. That is what we currently have now.
    1
  62. NeoDragonCount I can see that.  I am not a Ayn Rand fan.  Even Ron Paul who supported Ayn Rand supported some sort of a government, just more of a state and local one like I do.  There is a desire to have government.  To much government is just as bad as no government.
    1
  63. NeoDragonCount Are you sure no one gets left behind? Other countries have just as many problems with their healthcare system as the US does.  Also, who is going to provide that healthcare when you lack skilled workers?
    1
  64. NeoDragonCount You do have a problem with rationing.  You have just as many problems as the US.  You just don't realize it because you are probably like the vast majority of the population in that you don't directly deal with healthcare. 
    1
  65. NeoDragonCount You don't work in healthcare or are involved in it on a daily basis.  Finland does not have a min. wage. As far as healthcare is concern https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf
    1
  66. When broken down there is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage.
    1
  67. Not really a story but OK.
    1
  68. Nuclear Atheist, Stefan gets into detail on the issue. That is why he is great to go to. Someone like Kyle and most regressive liberals just shout appeal to emotion catch phrases. So Stefan gets to the point, you are just too ignorant to follow.
    1
  69. Kyle is an economic illiterate. He just said that if you tied the min. wage to productivity it would be $22/hr. He just compared the least productive workers of society to overall productivity.
    1
  70. People talking about the min. wage and the cost of living are ignoring one important detail. The min. wage enforces how much is paid per hour, not per week. What makes you assume those workers are even working full time?
    1
  71. ***** Look up Skilled Biased Technological Change. Wages have kept up just fine with productivity. Also, you have to consider that with increased productivity goods and services are cheaper and better.  Cars these days are safer, last longer, get better mileage and cheaper.  Poor people have smart phones.  You can't tie the min. wage to inflation.  Doing that is saying that everything inflates.  If so than everything will be more expensive then it is now.  A brick cell phone cost $4000 in today's money in the late 80s.  But today smart phones are far cheaper and have more computing power than what put a man on the moon. 
    1
  72. ***** Skilled Biased Technological Change is not a hypothesis.   We have seen it.  Also, cost of living is going down when you consider how goods and services are better and cheaper.  You also have to consider that most charts that try to say wages are not increasing start around 1970.  In the mid 60s we had the payroll tax increase.  That means that in order for a business to pay a higher wage they would have to pay a higher tax.  So to get around that they paid in benefits.  The min. wage is what it is, the minimum.  You are the one talking about illiteracy when you do not understand the term "minimum".  In reality the minimum is $0.  The min. wage just creates a gap from $0 to $7.25. That means if you are only worth $5/hr you will not get a job.  Plus, what does min. wage purchasing power even mean?  Are you referring to purchasing power of the dollar?  I will agree that in some cases that is a problem, mainly in areas the federal government has tampered with.  But how much the min. wage can purchase means nothing . All a min. wage enforces is how much a business has to pay per hour if they hire someone.  It does not enforce how much they have to pay per week.  Who can buy more?  Someone working 20 hours a week on $5/hr or someone working 10 hours a week on  $8/hr.? 
    1
  73. ***** I have read that.  As is we lack researchers, doctors, professors and other skilled workers.  So to say that SBTC is not a thing is incorrect.  People need to develop the skills to earn more.  Certain jobs are going away thus people need to develop, at least a different set of skills.  That is the way it goes.  There are other factors that I mentioned led to income inequality as well. "That's a pretty big claim. I mean, it depends on a lot of factors. Where do you live? In the city, in the suburbs or in a rural area? Generally speaking, certain things have gotten cheaper while others have not. Housing has definitely not, healthcare has definitely not, education has most definitely not." I agree.  Land can change price.  But I find it ironic how you mentioned housing, education and healthcare where those are three areas the federal government has been heavily involved in.  "Yea, I know what the minimum wage is, and you still don't know what illiteracy means. Please go look it up in the dictionary." You still don't know what the word minimum means.  Please go look it up in the dictionary. "Seriously, this is basic economics. You don't know what the difference between real and nominal wages are? The more you comment, the more clueless you look." I do.  In the end you do not understand what the word minimum means.  Going back and reading another one of your previous comments you mentioned wealth inequality.  Wealth does not equal income.  You need to also learn what wealth is.
    1
  74. Or the fact that "living wage" is subjective and means nothing in the end.
    1
  75. "The truth is that almost 80% of the people working minimum wage are adults" An adult is 18 and older. Teens usually don't get a job until they are 16, may 15 and rarely at 14. But say 14 to 17, that is three years. Now you have the ages of 18 to 78 (average life expectancy) that is for adult. That skews you stat.
    1
  76. I like this guy's stance on these issues. Good for Trump.
    1
  77. Even if we removed child labor laws we won't have an issue.
    1
  78. C Wilson Doesn't matter.  We have Trump as president.  :)
    1
  79. C Wilson Ok
    1
  80. "Red states" receive money because of farm subsidizes.
    1
  81. I am not a Trump supporter and I love this. Reduce the size of the federal government. The economy is going to boom now.
    1
  82. ***** Illegal immigrants are another target group for democrats.  That has always been the democrats strategy, find a target group and use them to buy votes.  It is sad but what makes it worse is how they are now using illegal immigrants who are breaking the law. People have no problem with immigrants.  I have many friends who are republican (I am not) and the support immigration.  They have a problem with illegals.  But the democrats have become so extreme on the issue that they will call you a racist when you want to remove illegal immigrants.  That is a problem.
    1