- Joined
- Mar 14, 2012
- Messages
- 29,135
- Reaction score
- 1,520
- Location
- US, California - federalist
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Damn fine.
This removes money from circulation, causing a depression.
The failure of 1929 was twofold.
First, it was a worldwide depression. And it was made worse because most governments had their money tied to a fixed commodity, like gold or silver. The price of those goes up, the value of the currency goes up.
In the US it was made worse not by capitalism, but speculation and easy credit. When stocks and bonds became due (bought on credit), people could not pay the amount owed and the values snowballed down. And as the price of gold and silver increased, it made the currency more valuable and harder to spend for common things.
Most people do not look at the entire picture. Here is a simple example. If money is tied to silver and it is $1 an ounce, then things are easily affordable. If silver jumps to $2 an ounce, now the currency is more valuable, and people stop spending as the money is of more value. This removes money from circulation, causing a depression (which is the opposite of a recession - where money becomes worthless). In a depression, you hold your money instead of paying off debts, because it is worth more. It is also hard to find a job because wages have also increased. The $1 you made prior is not the value of $2.
This once again was worldwide, not regional just to the US. In Germany, it was the opposite. They did not suffer a depression, but a run-away recession with money becoming less valuable because they tried to print their way out of trouble. In the US and most countries they decoupled their currencies from a commodity and this let it assume a more reasonable value in keeping with the economy at the time.
The failure of 1929 was twofold.
First, it was a worldwide depression. And it was made worse because most governments had their money tied to a fixed commodity, like gold or silver. The price of those goes up, the value of the currency goes up.
In the US it was made worse not by capitalism, but speculation and easy credit. When stocks and bonds became due (bought on credit), people could not pay the amount owed and the values snowballed down. And as the price of gold and silver increased, it made the currency more valuable and harder to spend for common things.
Most people do not look at the entire picture. Here is a simple example. If money is tied to silver and it is $1 an ounce, then things are easily affordable. If silver jumps to $2 an ounce, now the currency is more valuable, and people stop spending as the money is of more value. This removes money from circulation, causing a depression (which is the opposite of a recession - where money becomes worthless). In a depression, you hold your money instead of paying off debts, because it is worth more. It is also hard to find a job because wages have also increased. The $1 you made prior is not the value of $2.
This once again was worldwide, not regional just to the US. In Germany, it was the opposite. They did not suffer a depression, but a run-away recession with money becoming less valuable because they tried to print their way out of trouble. In the US and most countries they decoupled their currencies from a commodity and this let it assume a more reasonable value in keeping with the economy at the time.
It has been decades since I looked at the events of 1929 . Thank you for a damn fine refresher.
Razorsedge64, due to wage differentials, the minimum wage rate effects upon the rates of USA’s lowest 40 percentiles of employees, range from critical to substantial.Moot point. States are raising their minimum wages without the Feds interfering. And again only about 1 million Americans at any given time make the fictitious minimum wage.
…
Razoredge64, 40%of USA’s employees who earning the lowest wage rates are consequential, and the numbers or portions of those employees earning precisely $7.25 per hour are effectively much less consequential to our economy.Moot point. States are raising their minimum wages without the Feds interfering. And again only about 1 million Americans at any given time make the fictitious minimum wage.
…
.
To some extent the minimum rate bolsters the median wage rate.
More importantly it makes America uncompetitive and drives millions and millions of jobs off shore much like unions did a generation ago. Leave it to liberals to get everything 100 wrong!
Nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.
.
10 Nobel Prizes in the last 30 years. What a surprise Danny the liberal got another one wrong!!
Razoredge64, 40%of USA’s employees who earning the lowest wage rates are consequential,
Oozlefinch, almost all Domino drivers provide their employers with a vehicle that’s usually motor driven. There's consideration for the value of the vehicle, insurance risk if the employers do not themselves cover what is a much higher cost commercial risk, and all of the other vehicle operating and maintain expenses. Certainly those Pizza delivery drivers should be compensated in excess of $7.25 per hour.The percent of US workers who make minimum wage is 2.3%.
I think the term you meant to use is "inconsequential".
And tell me, what are those "bottom 40%" doing to get themselves out of their hole? Are they trying to learn new skills? Are they trying to relocate to where the cost of living is lower? Are they taking advantage of programs to help them earn more?
This is the thing, I have no interest in helping minimum workers, who expect to do as little as possible and make wages not in keeping with their work. I have not made "minimum wage" since I was in High School. And even that was for only 3 months, I got a performance raise and promotion after that. I simply can not comprehend somebody in their 30s complaining about only making minimum wage. What in the hell have they done in the previous 12 years to earn more? Have they never learned a single skill, nor worked long enough to get a raise simply through longevity?
And if their company never gave them a raise for time worked, why in the hell are they still there? Leave, and find another job. It is only minimum wage you say, so leave and find a company that will pay you more at least because you were a good employee if nothing else.
Hell, even delivery drivers at Domino's make more than that.
... due to wage differentials, the minimum wage rate effects upon the rates of USA’s lowest 40 percentiles of employees, range from critical to substantial. …
Oozlefinch, you correctly pointed out that my grammar was poor. The wording should have been, 40 % of all USA employees are earning lower wage rates and their low wage rates are economically detrimental to our nation. How many or what portion of those low wage rate employees earning precisely $7.25 per hour are of no particular consequence to our economy.… 40%of USA’s employees who earning the lowest wage rates are consequential, and the numbers or portions of those employees earning precisely $7.25 per hour are effectively much less consequential to our economy. …
Oozlefinch, almost all Domino drivers provide their employers with a vehicle that’s usually motor driven. There's consideration for the value of the vehicle, insurance risk if the employers do not themselves cover what is a much higher cost commercial risk, and all of the other vehicle operating and maintain expenses. Certainly those Pizza delivery drivers should be compensated in excess of $7.25 per hour. Oozlefinch, you correctly pointed out that my grammar was poor. The wording should have been, 40 % of all USA employees are earning lower wage rates and their low wage rates are economically detrimental to our nation. How many or what portion of those low wage rate employees earning precisely $7.25 per hour are of no particular consequence to our economy.
Oozlefinch, "Nobody is forcing these people to live at minimum wage” is among the more foolish sentences that I’ve read. Your implying that so many people choose to be poor? So many aren’t sufficiently intelligent to consider all their options, and they all have the same opportunities and advantages as you? The working poor are not a tiny segment of our population. Many cannot even reasonably function and others have great responsibilities that entrap them.But you seem to miss my actual point. Nobody is forcing these people to live at minimum wage. …
Think in terms of walking in the other person’s shoes.
Oozlefinch, "Nobody is forcing these people to live at minimum wage” is among the more foolish sentences that I’ve read. Your implying that so many people choose to be poor? So many aren’t sufficiently intelligent to consider all their options, and they all have the same opportunities and advantages as you? The working poor are not a tiny segment of our population. Many cannot even reasonably function and others have great responsibilities that entrap them.
I don’t suppose you’re particularly and uniquely blessed, but I also don’t suppose you’re uniquely disadvantaged. There are many people that are dealing with conditions and circumstances far beyond what you and I could or wish to endure, or even beyond our conceptions. Think in terms of walking in the other person’s shoes.
Respectfully, Supposn
Oozlefinch, you continue discussing “THE” minimum wage rate, whatever it might effectively be in different states or counties. The minimum wage rate effects approximately 40% of USA employees wage rates.
Those effects upon their rates range from critical to those low rage rate employees earning at or near the minimum rate where they are located, to substantial upon those within that lowest 40 percentile’s wage rate bracket that are of higher wage rates.
We’re Not discussing the $7.25 federal, or the $15.39 San Francisco minimum rate. We’re discussing the rates of USA’s 40% of employees earning the lowest bracket of wage rates. Their low wage rates have a detrimental effect upon our nation’s economy. How many or what proportion of them are earning the precise rate of $7.25 per hour, or a higher rate in some counties, is of absolutely no importance.
Respectfully, Supposn
. Your next responding post stated your disbelief “they”, (the lowest earning 40% of USA employees?) “"choose" to be poor. But a majority of them are poor because of poor life choices. And that is on them”. In your opinion, the majority of lowest earning 40 percentiles of USA employees low wage rates are primarily or entirely due to their “poor life choices”? I wonder about these detrimental life choices that could not or were not repaired.Oozlefinch, … Your post demeans 40% of all USA wage earners. If only a fifth of those lower wage rate earners were substantially at fault for their own lower wage-rates, would you still have contempt for the entire lowest earning 40 percentile of all USA wage earners? If only a quarter of those lower wage rate earners were substantially at fault, would you still have contempt for 40% of USA's wage earners? If no more than half of those lower wage rate earners were substantially at fault, would you still have contempt for 40% of USAs wage earners? …
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?