Biden to Urge Federal Reserve to Take on Racial Wealth Gap

[ElCubano]

W


Why do liberals always think giving the government control over more is the key to solving problems? You're Cuban which I would think would make you more prone to be smaller government given Cuba's history of its government forcing its will on people and businesses. I do love how liberals always seem to pass the buck on it though. I think this should be done, I just don't exactly know the best way to make it happen, but as long as I get to continue to maintain my current standard of living, and get to give a little to charity then I am an awesome person and can dictate how things should be forced on others (as long as I get to continue in my current standard of living that is). We could kind of model our government and system after Venezuela or Cuba or the USSR.

Do you think government forcing businesses to have a minimum wage is the correct answer? Maybe government should own the businesses and take the private aspect completely out of it like Cuba did. Let's create this perfect liberal utopia where everyone has the same amount, no person makes more than the next person.

In your reply to piezoe you implied that we have high unemployment due to AI taking our jobs. Please show us data that indicates that’s why are current unemployment is what it is. Everything else you wrote above is deflection. You have no idea what party I belong to.

 

[Bugsy]

In your reply to piezoe you implied that we have high unemployment due to AI taking our jobs. Please show us data that indicates that’s why are current unemployment is what it is. Everything else you wrote above is deflection. You have no idea what party I belong to. All noise no substance.

Let me give you a lesson in life. Just because you perceive something to be something doesn't make it a fact. You say I implied AI was the reason for unemployment. No where in anything I stated did I ever state AI was the reason we have unemployment.

Except we live in the age of automation. How many jobs would be cut because it's cheaper to use machines to flip burgers than to pay humans $15? How much more productivity would they gain from machines over minimum wage workers making $15? How much less complaining? Automation is a reality and expected to increase over time. Forcing companies to pay higher wages where value isn't increased to meet those wages just propels this scenario.

Do you always use mental gymnastics in order to make a point? Lmao at deflection. Automation is a fact. Why don't use use data in order to prove your point that automation isn't in fact reducing jobs but is in fact creating more. Everything else you wrote is deflection. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to see you are a liberal. You make excuses for government intervention based on skin color and think government should be forcing businesses to pay higher wages. These are Liberal and Democrat talking points. Republicans don't virtue signal about race and bigger government.

 

[Cuddles]

Because they have a monopoly on speech. Social media is the modern day town square. Studies show that Google can sway an entire election by slanting which news its userbase sees in searches. You liberals want the government to have a monopoly over all business. You want the government to force its will on all business. Why don't you liberals lead the charge and give all of your money to poor people and be equal to them? Oh that's right. You only want to virtue signal with a bit of charity and bitching about how everyone else should be doing, as long as you get to maintain your current standard of living while tossing a bit of change to charity and telling everyone "Look how good of a person I am! I take care of minorities, give to charity, and help yell about how our government needs to force everyone else to do more for poor people and minorities."

I'm a moderate. I can Google the newspaper of my choice and have immediate access, if I can't,I go to the dozens of competing search engines to Google. I can still go to the town square without the government stifling my speech.

So I ask again, why are you so pro government on a non issues (free speech on private platforms) yet so anti government on a real issue (the diminishing earning power of Americans)?

 

[Bugsy]

I'm a moderate. I can Google the newspaper of my choice and have immediate access, if I can't,I go to the dozens of competing search engines to Google. I can still go to the town square without the government stifling my speech.

So I ask again, why are you so pro government on a non issues (free speech on private platforms) yet so anti government on a real issue (the diminishing earning power of Americans)?

Oh, well since you do something a certain way that makes it settled science. Unfortunately, it doesn't. Science is against you. Yes, social media has the power to sway elections. It's actually pretty well documented, but here's an article for you. It's not only Google but tech giants in general. When you have Twitter and YouTube banning conservatives left and right, as well as their arguments, you are only allowing one sides viewpoints to be heard. Lol at non issue. Just because you disagree with science and have no care for election integrity doesn't make something a non issue. For a moderate your viewpoints are certainly slanted left.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/10/could-google-influence-presidential-election

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/epstein-testimony

 

[Cuddles]

Oh, well since you do something a certain way that makes it settled science. Unfortunately, it doesn't. Science is against you. Yes, social media has the power to sway elections. It's actually pretty well documented, but here's an article for you. It's not only Google but tech giants in general. When you have Twitter and YouTube banning conservatives left and right, as well as their arguments, you are only allowing one sides viewpoints to be heard. Lol at non issue. Just because you disagree with science and have no care for election integrity doesn't make something a non issue. For a moderate your viewpoints are certainly slanted left.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/10/could-google-influence-presidential-election

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/epstein-testimony

So now it's "science"? Can you stop pivoting from topic to topic? It's impossible to have an educated conversation otherwise.

Let me ask you this, are you in favor of a pro business SCOTUS that grants corporations the power you rail against through decisions such as citizens untied? After all, money is free speech, and Google is free to allocate their resources as they see fit to help the candidate of their choice.

Nevermind the whole private property bit on the constitution

 

[ElCubano]

Let me give you a lesson in life. Just because you perceive something to be something doesn't make it a fact. You say I implied AI was the reason for unemployment. No where in anything I stated did I ever state AI was the reason we have unemployment.



Do you always use mental gymnastics in order to make a point? Lmao at deflection. Automation is a fact. Why don't use use data in order to prove your point that automation isn't in fact reducing jobs but is in fact creating more. Everything else you wrote is deflection. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to see you are a liberal. You make excuses for government intervention based on skin color and think government should be forcing businesses to pay higher wages. These are Liberal and Democrat talking points. Republicans don't virtue signal about race and bigger government.

Re Read my posts and take a page out of the life lesson you gave me. Thanks for taking time to share your thoughts.

"Just because you perceive something to be something doesn't make it a fact."

 

[Tsing Tao]

I haven't actually made that assumption, but let's assume it.

This is a far more complex issue than meets the eye. I am only addressing aggregate factors here. One is the aggregate rise in prices due to an increase in the cost of labor at the low margin. Another factor is an aggregate increase in household expenditures due to higher wages. Another factor has to do with what the reduction in subsidies converts to.

Prices will rise of course, but the rise will be far less than that predicted using faulty arithmetic. You are a numbers person, so you won't make those mistakes. As a starting point, why not do a simple calculation yourself and see what you come up with.. Look at what fraction of your total costs are due to labor at the low wage margin. Than calculate what your prices would have have to rise to if you gave a certain percent raise to your lowest paid hourly workers holding profits constant. That would be a start.

Alright, lets do it. A simple P&L of a restaurant. I just put it into Excel. Here you go. Free free to challenge any of the costs. This is Piezoe's Bistro located on the corner of "Fantasy Land Dr." and "Liberal Utopia Pl." Try the Foie Gras. Its to die for.

An eatery with 20 staff that are paid hourly, at $7.10 an hour. You want to give them $15 an hour. Lets assume for easy math they work 160 hours a month (40 a week and its a 4 week month, again for easy calcs). Assuming FICA impact and SS, and a rather small state pay of 3%. The resulting pay raise takes our razor thin margin of 6.4% and completely puts us in the Red. Now, how much of this is gotten back by pricing and through other methods? I await your enlightenment.

 

[smallfil]

Look at China who is lauded as the best country by extreme liberals with a booming economy and has on paper continued to grow beyond one's dream. Anyone believe that fairy tale? ET trolls probably. China pays a lot of its workers the grand sum of $3 per day. They are happy with that because they are able to buy food to eat and maybe, have some monies left over to buy necessities like shampoo, soap or toothpaste. Now, do you seriously, believe the wealth gap in China is going to be narrowed in any way, shape or form? Communism never brings anyone up on the economic ladder except, for their leaders who own all the businesses. In the US, you can be anyone you wish to be and be filthy rich if you choose so. Now, what separates those who are successful and those who are failures is effort. Jessica Simpson and Kylie Jenner are both billionaires because of their hard work in putting up businesses that rewarded their efforts. In contrast, you have lazy slugs who get welfare all their lives and demand more handouts but, still mired in poverty? So, whose fault is it? The lazy slugs who refuse to work and make something of themselves or those that worked their asses off and became filthy rich in the process?

 

[bone]

So the candidate whose signature political career move was jailing a disproportionate number of black Americans through his crime legislation, and then ripping their faces off with 25% credit card interest rates and stricter bankruptcy laws skewed towards shielding high interest credit lenders - now wants to pander. I will never really be able to relate to the political mind.

 

[Corky5]

Lazy slugs will always be lazy slugs and continue to make excuses. Let them move somewhere else and i mean to another country that accepts lazy slugs.
As for blacks in prison, the overwhelming majority are in for violent crimes and serious drug offenses which have nothing to do with biased laws but everything to do with violent behavior and irresposnsible decision making. They are not in prison for minor drug offenses, thats a total lie.