The Biden Presidency

As the useful idiots on this board will proudly explain, it's bc the businesses won't pay these. People the $25/hr they get on unemployment and therefore it's their fault

[tw]1400897819519631366[/tw]
 
Maybe I'm not as good at math as you thought. Thanks for pointing that out.

In my view, though, the point still stands: regardless of what the national average is, a CO Wendy's worker making minimum wage would get $174 in a typical unemployment check (60% of the average weekly pay over the last two quarters) plus the $300 for total annual pay of $24,648. You'd have to pay them between $14-15/hour to beat that after taxes, which seems entirely reasonable to me. Again, the bigger issue here is that the average wage in the L&H industry comes out to about $20,000 after taxes. I think- as most voters nationally do- that we should pay people more than that, and I hope that companies start doing so when the government stops.

Here is the bigger point beyond the math though: the evidence doesn't support that expanded UI is keeping workers at home.
- When there is a labor shortage, you expect to see rapid wage growth as employers compete for talent. Wage acceleration is definitely happening in the leisure and hospitality industry, but that is just a return to normalcy and average wages haven't yet returned to pre-pandemic rates. If we start seeing wages accelerate past pre-pandemic averages, then I'll join you in being concerned.
- That wage acceleration is very much focused on the L&H sector, which doesn't have a particularly high correlation to wages in other industries as we saw when wages dropped there much faster than in other sectors in 2020.
- The L&H industry still saw more job growth than any other sector by a significant margin, and again most of this is just because it was so far behind other sectors to begin with.
- Low-wage industries saw much higher job growth than higher-wage sectors in April, which isn't what you would expect to see if UI was truly preventing poor people from working.
- The bigger issues in the labor market seem to be two things: 1) People are still afraid to go to work, which is why you see a very firm correlation between improving unemployment rates and improving vaccination rates and 2) Schools are still closed- which is something I imagine we agree on is a shame- which is preventing mothers from getting back into the workforce.

If we could get more people vaccinated and get more schools open, then I imagine you would see any concerns about labor shortages dissipate.

Just reposting from last month since virtually everything still applies. I just hired three part-time workers at $15/hour and three full-time salaried workers- jobs that all received way more applications than anything I've ever posted. Two of the part-timers and one of the full-timers had been laid off during the pandemic and were receiving unemployment. All were thrilled to be getting back to work. And, fortunately, my business model is good enough that I can pay people $15/hour without crying about it.
 
You know what would be awesome? Treating everyone like an individual

By that are you saying we should ignore all context and pretend like everyone is exactly the same? Or, can we acknowledge that some people have it worse than others often due to factors out of their control?
 
By that are you saying we should ignore all context and pretend like everyone is exactly the same? Or, can we acknowledge that some people have it worse than others often due to factors out of their control?

Outcomes in life are in part down to luck (reflecting the lottery that gives people a certain set of genes or parents or places of birth). It seems self-evident. Just as it is self-evident that things like grit, determination, self-reliance are qualities that also make a difference. It is a combination of both things. The challenge for policy is how to design programs to help the disadvantaged (or unlucky) without disincentivizing work effort and personal responsibility. The devil is always in the details. But I don't think we can throw up our hands and say it is impossible. And we should be humble enough to look at what other countries do well and try to learn from that.
 
Outcomes in life are in part down to luck (reflecting the lottery that gives people a certain set of genes or parents or places of birth). It seems self-evident. Just as it is self-evident that things like grit, determination, self-reliance are qualities that also make a difference. It is a combination of both things. The challenge for policy is how to design programs to help the disadvantaged (or unlucky) without disincentivizing work effort and personal responsibility. The devil is always in the details. But I don't think we can throw up our hands and say it is impossible. And we should be humble enough to look at what other countries do well and try to learn from that.

Unfortunately, it's becoming harder and harder for politicians to win by being nuanced and thoughtful.
 
By that are you saying we should ignore all context and pretend like everyone is exactly the same? Or, can we acknowledge that some people have it worse than others often due to factors out of their control?

I've acknowledged a thousand times people have it worse... mostly due to economic circumstances.

But I've never mistreated any black or brown or gay person or whatever and I'm not gonna be lectured every day as if I have simply by existing
 
I've acknowledged a thousand times people have it worse... mostly due to economic circumstances.

But I've never mistreated any black or brown or gay person or whatever and I'm not gonna be lectured every day as if I have simply by existing

In that case, I agree with you. I don't know that I've ever accused you of mistreating anyone in your day-to-day life, but I'm sorry if I have come off that way. It would be ridiculous for me to do so given how little I know about you.

The issue with treating everyone strictly as an individual is that we then never support those who need help as a society, and inequality persists.

As you said, many people have it worse, mostly due to economic circumstances. And, unfortunately, minorities tend to be in worse economic circumstances given the history of our country, so we should look to help them. The same can be said about white people who live in rural areas where industries have been left behind over the past half-century especially- they have it worse due to economic circumstances, and we should look to help them as well.
 
By that are you saying we should ignore all context and pretend like everyone is exactly the same? Or, can we acknowledge that some people have it worse than others often due to factors out of their control?
He literally thinks hundreds of years of systems and actions have literally no bearing on circumstances now

There are people alive that dealt with Jim Crow laws etc

And he thinks none of that is an issue

He’s on record for it

It’s useless to keep bringing up facts and logic to the guy. He’s a fraud head to toe.
 
This is the guy they say is a genius while trying to act like Biden is lost lol

[tw] 1401337629732339718[/tw]
 
****hole cities didn't have to be that way. I guess they'll need. To. Vote blue again bc of. How bad their situation has become

[tw]1401498161290616835[/tw]
 
Created by Reagan initiative to empty mental health care facilities.
You can look it up.

Created by dwindling tax revenues afforded chamber of commerce in the hope of advancing a trickle down economy.
You can look that up too
 
Created by Reagan initiative to empty mental health care facilities.
You can look it up.

Created by dwindling tax revenues afforded chamber of commerce in the hope of advancing a trickle down economy.
You can look that up too

We could return to mass institutionalization. But as a society we no longer view that as acceptable. I would imagine that our friends of a libertarian persuasion would be especially leery of mass institutionalization even of mentally ill people. Some may even favor an approach based upon personal responsibility and people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. I've been waiting for them to put forth their ideas for dealing with homelessness. So far crickets.
 
We could return to mass institutionalization. But as a society we no longer view that as acceptable. I would imagine that our friends of a libertarian persuasion would be especially leery of mass institutionalization even of mentally ill people. Some may even favor an approach based upon personal responsibility and people pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. I've been waiting for them to put forth their ideas for dealing with homelessness. So far crickets.

Remove the ridiculous zoning restrictions that make it so expensive to build affordable housing in these large cities. Abolish minimum wage laws that make the least skilled workers unemployable. Stop the overcriminalization we've had in this country for far too long (namely drugs) that give people a record and make it much more likely they'll be homeless down the road. Empower private charities that are better equipped to give people the tailored help they need, rather than pumping money into wasteful, one size fits all gov't bureaucracies.

And my not so libertarian opinion - acknowledge that some portion of the homeless cannot or do not want to be helped - if they're jeopardizing public safety, lock 'em up.
 
Remove the ridiculous zoning restrictions that make it so expensive to build affordable housing in these large cities. Abolish minimum wage laws that make the least skilled workers unemployable. Stop the overcriminalization we've had in this country for far too long (namely drugs) that give people a record and make it much more likely they'll be homeless down the road. Empower private charities that are better equipped to give people the tailored help they need, rather than pumping money into wasteful, one size fits all gov't bureaucracies.

And my not so libertarian opinion - acknowledge that some portion of the homeless cannot or do not want to be helped - if they're jeopardizing public safety, lock 'em up.

Permitting for affordable housing should definitely be reformed. I've been beating that drum for a while. That's the lowest of low hanging fruit. NIMBYism is strong is a lot of places. The reality is that has to be overcome. I hate libs who express compassion but don't want a mental health center for the homeless in their neighborhood. Or some affordable housing down the block.

On a careful selective basis I could go along with criminalizing some aspects of the homeless culture.

I kind of agree with you we should criminalize some things less and maybe some things more.

The private charities part is kind of like being in favor of apple pie. Many do good work. Maybe they can be empowered to do more. I'm not really familiar with the roadblocks that might be preventing them from doing more.

What about a guaranteed minimum income? The least bureaucratic, most laissez faire option for state intervention into the lives of needy people. I think there is a tradeoff to be negotiated between getting rid of the minimum wage and replacing it with a guaranteed minimum income that is both compassionate and efficient in terms of incentives to work.

On a somewhat whimsical note, I hear Big Pharma has some great stuff in the pipeline.
 
Last edited:
We could always protect our southern border and get hard on China for the drugs being smuggled into the country but I think that’s racist.
 
Back
Top