Korean Job Discussion Forums

[huffdaddy]

[Satori]

Im no economist, I admit that. But didn't a guy called Bill do something called "balancing the budget", and had not a guy called George now created the worst defecit in the history of the states? Im just saying, maybe Democrat style economics is not such bogus hoodoo after all...

[cbclark4]

Never said it would ruin the economy. Justed stated that simple math shows what happens to prices when cost is raised.

My math is based on level supply demand there's an econimic term for that something like everything else stays the same or some such.

Bread will always be marked down when day old, How much of a markdown will depend on the excess supply. Waste and shrinkage are built into the margin.

Demand effects supply, supply effects demand. Yes prices are adjusted accordingly the margin is maintained there wil be profit. This is usually reserved for the big ticket.

Demand creates supply.
Supply creates demand.

When the money supply increases so does price.

When more money is available for housing (interest rate low) housing prices rise, when less money is avaialble (high interest) etc.

Excess supply will always have a negative effect on price and profit.

Margin can be allowed to suffer but that would be a short term problem.
Correction would have to be made if the business were to continue.
If the Price based on Margin and Cost cannot be maintained then the volume (supply) will be less, thus cost would need to be cut thus a layoff.

Like I said earlier raising the min wage is good (and maybe should be adjusted for inflation (1970 was $2.75)) so I think $24/hr should be the min. wage, that should have no effect on the economy. Now in order to accomplish that there would need to be a definition of an obscene wage to counter the effect at the top of the pay scale. Maybe we should bring back price and wage controls those worked so well in the 70's.

The min wage being bandied about is liberal lip service it will have no real effect on the working poor and is a temporary fix, it needs weight to be efective. I think it should effect the economy, I don't think we should implement a min wage that does not effect the economy.

cbc

[Satori]

[huffdaddy]

[EFLtrainer]

[cbclark4]

[superacidjax]

[Octavius Hite]

cbclark4 wrote:

[superacidjax]

[Moldy Rutabaga]

Thanks for the link, superacidjax. I'm reading the blog now. Just an off-topic suggestion: your tiny light-grey type on black screen is going to make my eyes fall out if I don't cut and paste soon!

I do find it a little disingenuous that these advocacy sites criticizing a minimum wage hike begin their arguments by saying that only a minority of people make minimum wage anyway, but.. if we raise it our economy will be ripped apart. If very few people make minimum wage it can't affect the overall system much if it's raised.. can it?

Ken:>

[thepeel]

Economists don't agree on much, but they do agree on this. Raising the minimum wage will put some people out of work in the short run but not necessarily the medium or long run. But, those who are put out of work, are those who can handle temporary unemployment the least well, and as such the policy is questionable from this perspective. But, there is a benefit to some workers (though, those who work MW are a small, small fraction of the labour force) and the policy can be supported from this perspective.

Certainly, the MW at the rate it currently is causes unemployment among the youth and certain members of a, ahem, permanent underclass. The more anything costs the less of it we consume...And labour is no different.

But, the biggest factor of all, in America, is that the higher the MW is raised, the more Mexicans (who work for sub-MW) will be hired and the less 'Americans' will be hired. Sometimes, we must confront the law of unintended consequences.

[superacidjax]

[Octavius Hite]

superacidjax, sorry but you have some errors and some serious mixing of topics.

Yes outsourcing is good, I don't disagree with that, I think that there is no way Americans can produce refridgerators cheaper or better than Indians or Chinese. The problem is that Wal-Mart (and others) acts (by not lowering the prices) signifigantly. Yes, you can buy garbage such as halloween candy and cheap chinese DVD players but for the most part refrigerators, cars, electronics, home furnishings, etc etc are still the same price or have risen with inflation over the past twenty years. Just looking at food products the price has risen but the products have often shrunk in size. Meanwhile, corporate profits in almost all sectors are at record levels. So Wal-mart took those cost savings and instead of actually passing them onto the consumer they took them and gave them to shareholders.

Now....

That's a good thing except the vast majority of min. wage workers don't own stock, thats probably 30 million Americans (at least). That means that 30 mil. people are not benefitting whatsoever from offshoring. IN fact offshoring means that they will never have a good steady factory job. Not having a good job means that they can't buy a house, a new car and extra car etc etc etc etc. Also having a growing number of underemployed disenfranchised people can sow major social programs. To see this just go to most muslim countries.

[superacidjax]