Re: bush tax cut and small businesses

From: sinister (sinister_at_nospam.invalid)
Date: 10/03/04 

Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 22:03:42 GMT

"da pickle" <jcpickels@nospamhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ovSdnQOKy59J8_3cRVn-uQ@www.bayou.com...
> <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.

No one is claiming that.

The question is what effect on employment will a *particular* increase in
the minimum wage have?

Card and Krueger did indeed show that in one particular case, there was no
effect.

>
>

Quantcast