So I was walking to work the other day when a man approached me...

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Private companies don't print money. They are not the Federal Government nor the Central Bank.

They just reallocate what they already have.

But the money was, according to you, not doiong anything previously, therefore it wasn't really part of the money supply, it was just a bit in a computer. So once it is doing something, it's the same as if the government had printed more money.

It's just like how China could cause a massive devaluation of the dollar, despite the fact that none of their mints actually print them. They have a large number of dollars that aren't in circulation; if they decide to put these dollars in circulation, they've increased the money supply.

[Flip McWho]

The problem with that is that the money is already distributed before it is reallocated to workers. It's just going to them instead of stockholders, upper level executives, etc.

Don't forget that those stockholders and upper level excutives are gonna want pay rises as well. They wanna keep profits up and if people have more money to spend then people can pay more for the things they really want.

[Kuciwalker]

Ted, you don't need any sort of fancy economics for this, you just have to look at the situation before and after the raise in wages and ask, what has changed?

[Ted Striker]

Nah, you are looking at it in too much of a simplified view. It depends more on the larger economic conditions rathar than the meager effects of minimum wage on the overall economy.

In the 1980s, the minimum wage was frozen, and inflation was still going up, and the purchasing power of minimum wage earners went steadily down.

It just hurts the little guy.

[Kuciwalker]

Ted, at most, this results in a bit of redistribution of goods and services from the wealthy to the poor. It cannot drive economic growth.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Ted, you don't need any sort of fancy economics for this, you just have to look at the situation before and after the raise in wages and ask, what has changed?

Sure, I can do that.

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/issuebriefs_ib195

By the way, alot of states have decided to step in and raise the wage when the Fed would not. It makes absolutley no sense whatsover to have an across the board wage in states where living expenses are much higher.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Ted, at most, this results in a bit of redistribution of goods and services from the wealthy to the poor. It cannot drive economic growth.

That's not the point. It's about getting poor people the money they need to LIVE.


There are other WAY MORE IMPORTANT factors in driving economic growth than trying to keep poor people from getting more money.

[Kuciwalker]

Good job at being completely off the point.

xpost

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
That's not the point. It's about getting poor people the money they need to LIVE.


There are other WAY MORE IMPORTANT factors in driving economic growth than trying to keep poor people from getting more money.

Eh, no, the whole argument in this thread was that increasing the minimum wage would drive economic growth because people would be buying more stuff.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Eh, no, the whole argument in this thread was that increasing the minimum wage would drive economic growth because people would be buying more stuff.

That's YOUR point, son, not mine. What are you, DANISH????

I could care less about the overall economic situation, nor have I even touched upon it. There are way more important factors involved in the health of the economy. All I care about is poor people having more money to buy the things they need, and I know that them getting more money isn't going to cause inflationary panic, nor is it going to cause massive job loss, so it can only be a good thing.

[Kuciwalker]

Bull****. Your original post (to which I responded):

Originally posted by Ted Striker

Putting a few more bucks into the hands of the working poor means they'll spend it on stuff, sales go up, eveyone wins.

emphasis mine

[Ted Striker]

This is the very first post I made in this thread. DUH:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
In my opinion it can only be a good thing. It does undercut net profits for business, but will redistribute more wealth among the lower classes.


Reactionaries will tell you that the sky is falling and that businesses won't hire as many workers as they did before. They will tell you that business won't have as much money to reinvest into themselves to create more jobs. But I don't think that's the case, especially among the big corporations, where the extra cash just goes into stockholders bank accounts and upper level executives salaries and stock options anyway.

Where it would hurt the most is small business, and this is often cited in sound byte news reports. But those businesses will adjust.

[Kuciwalker]

Did I quote and respond to that?

(no)

Did your post I quoted and responded to support a position that increasing the minimum wage would create growth?

(yes)

[Ted Striker]

I could care less what Kuciwalker posts about.

Does the thread revolve around Kuciwalker? No, it does not. Your post is some sideshow that is a minor detail in what I wanted to talk about.

The main point I am making (which I opened up with) is that the purchasing power of poor people has gone down. Give them more money to buy stuff that they need to live, and they will purchase more stuff. Sales go up in the neighborhoods that they live in.

Does that equate overall economic growth? I don't know. NOR DID I EVER SAY IT WOULD. Nor do I even care.

So go build yourself another strawman to knock over.

Or draw a frame around it and declare yourself Danish Thread Police.

[Ted Striker]

Now, you tell me why it is a good idea to have poor people have less purchasing power?