Re: bush tax cut and small businesses

From: da pickle (jcpickels_at_nospamhotmail.com)
Date: 10/03/04 

Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 16:27:40 -0500

<royls@telus.net> wrote in message news:416028a7.3298801@news.telus.net...
> On Sun, 3 Oct 2004 07:06:17 -0500, "da pickle"
> <jcpickels@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >"Robert Vienneau" <rvien@see.sig.com> wrote in message
> >news:rvien-B69BC0.03145003102004@news.dreamscape.com...
> >> In article <MPG.1bc7a6d6b00075b1989701@digital-bear.dyndns.org>, Ben
> >> Franklin <bfranklin@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <415c57ff$0$27688$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>,
> >> > anonymous@online-pokerguide.com says...
> >> > > God next you fucking morons will tell me raising the minimum wage
.25
> >> > > cents will put small businesses out of business since it will raise
> >> > > their
> >> > > yearly expenses by 10,000$ or so... newsflash..
> >>
> >> > You are really not very intelligent are you? The huge impact of
raising
> >> > minimum wage is the elimination of entry level jobs which negatively
> >> > impacts the very people you claim you are trying to help.
> >>
> >> 1.0 INTRODUCTION
> >>
> >> "I was delighted to find in a dictionary the word MUMPSIMUS,
> >> which means stubborn persistence in an error that has been
> >> exposed."
> >> -- Joan Robinson
> >>
> >> I am afraid "Ben Franklin" has no understanding of economics
> >> whatsoever. The supposed "huge impact" he thinks will happen
> >> has no basis in theory or in empirical data. David Card and Alan
> >> Krueger's work showed the lack of empirical basis.
> >
> ><snip the "stuff">
> >
> >If you know anything about the arguments for and against the "minimum
wage"
> >... you would not make such statements, much less attempt to confuse even
> >yourself with so many "figures."
>
> I think I can guess who was really confused by the figures...
>
> >There are many arguments "for" and "against" the minimum wage, but there
is
> >plenty of "basis" in theory and empirical data to support the "against"
> >side. (You already know that the Card and Krueger "work" cannot be
> >replicated and has been discredited.) For a slightly different view, you
> >might review this: (I quote only a small part.)
> >
> >http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/against/against.htm
>
> Predictably enough, this silly little bit of propaganda relies almost
> exclusively on "papers" from corporate-funded right-wing "think"
> tanks. It also claims, ludicrously, that the one (1) more or less
> respectable paper cited, about employment in one (1) industry in one
> (1) state, "conclusively discredited" Card and Krueger, which is just
> an absurd, outrageous lie.
>
> -- Roy L

I find it fascinating that people might make a simple premise ...
"Arbitrarily raise and set the cost of a particular labor." ... and conclude
that this event will have no discernible effect on prices or employment.