Page 968 of 1476
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 2:51 pm
by bluetick
Senate GOP Blocks Minimum-wage Hike, thehill.com 4/30/2014
GOP House defeats minimum wage increase - Washington Times Mar 15, 2013
Republicans Call for Lowering, Eliminating Federal Minimum Wage - examiner.com Oct 6, 2010
Congress passed minimum wage hikes in 2007, 2008, and 2009. The GOP has blocked all efforts since '09 to raise the 7.25 standard.
And then there's this:
The minimum wage should have reached $21.72 an hour in 2012 if it kept up with increases in worker productivity. While advances in technology have increased the amount of goods and services than can be produced in a set amount of time, wages have remained relatively flat - Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2/13/2013
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 3:05 pm
by bluetick
from Business Insider - 12/2/2013
The nominal minimum wage has been the same since 2009, but its real value has decreased more than 8% in the past four years.
Just as seniors have been screwed for years by the use of inaccurate statistics for inflation adjustment calculations, minimum wage workers have been screwed by the lack of automatic adjustment at all. In 1960, the nominal minimum wage was $1.00, but that is equal to nearly $8 in today's dollars. In fact, the real minimum wage peaked in 1968 at $10.74 (2013 dollars). Since then, the purchasing power of the minimum wage has slowly fallen over time.
The value of the minimum wage should not decrease over time thanks to congressional failure to annually adjust it. For policymakers who support the minimum wage, no matter the level, it is inexcusable to not adjust it for inflation.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 4:10 pm
by Toemeesleather
WASHINGTON, Aug 21 (Reuters) - U.S. businesses are hiring at a robust rate. The only problem is that three out of four of the nearly 1 million hires this year are part-time and many of the jobs are low-paid.
Faltering economic growth at home and abroad and concern that President Barack Obama's signature health care law will drive up business costs are behind the wariness about taking on full-time staff, executives at staffing and payroll firms say.
But hey, unemployment is 5.5%....
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 4:36 pm
by bluetick
Corporate Profits Grow and Wages Slide - NY Times.com 4/4/2014
Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak - Forbes 11/30/2013
Corporate profits hit record as wages get squeezed - money.cnn.com 12/3/2012
U.S. Corporate Profits at All-Time High as GDP Growth Holds - economicmonitor 9/26/2013
Record Corporate Profits, Wages Stagnant - mmo-champion.com 11/13/2014
Corporate Profits Juggernaut Continues - 11/27/2014
Why Are US Corporate Profits So High? Because Wages are So Low - Reuters 1/24/2014
"The strength (in profits) is directly related to the weakness in hourly wages. Companies have not been able to raise prices much because of the economic recovery being fragile. But they've still managed to boost profits beyond anything ever seen before because they've gotten away with employing as few workers as possible at as low a rate as possible.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2015 5:14 pm
by bluetick
You might want to look at productivity vs wage charts, toe. It's a pretty wide gap that began 40 years ago...production continued skyward while wages broke off like a tree branch. About the time trickle-down economics and union busting became de rigueur.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 6:26 pm
by Professor Tiger
Any comment on Hillary's email scandal?
Or, at this point, what does it matter?
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 6:49 pm
by Professor Tiger
FWIW:
But they've still managed to boost profits beyond anything ever seen before because they've gotten away with employing as few workers as possible at as low a rate as possible.
I agree with that, even though it has always been the case. No business ever hired an employee out of altruism.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 7:24 pm
by Johnette's Daddy
Professor Tiger wrote:FWIW:
But they've still managed to boost profits beyond anything ever seen before because they've gotten away with employing as few workers as possible at as low a rate as possible.
I agree with that, even though it has always been the case. No business ever hired an employee out of altruism.
I beg to differ. There are countless "ne'er-do-well nephews", "owner's college-dropout sons" & "can-only-type-10-wpm-but-is-an-incredible-fellatrix" types on corporate payrolls all around the world.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 7:57 pm
by Jungle Rat
What email scandal?
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2015 9:32 pm
by Professor Tiger
All the time she was Secretary State, she conducted all her official business through a private email account server at her house. That way, she could always control access to her emails, avoid all those annoying archiving laws, defeat any subpeonas, etc. BTW, she disciplined employees who did the same thing.
Personally, I think she should have followed the Lois Lerner tactic and destroy emails by the thousands, and claim it was an accident.
Or maybe "find" subpeona'd emails on her coffee table.
Or have a flunkie stuff them into his socks and try to sneak them out of the Clinton Library.
Any of those tactics will work. The Clintons are pure teflon. She'll probably get a bump in the polls.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 12:13 am
by Dr. Strangelove
It's shady as all get-out...but unless something damning gets found in them now that they're being released, it's a tempest in a teapot. More doubling down on Bengahzi being the key to Republicans taking back the White House. We all know it's the greatest scandal in American history...but there's already been 7 Congressional investigations into the scandal, all led by Republicans, and thus far every investigation has cleared the administration of wrong-doing.
http://www.latimes.com/world/africa/la- ... story.html
BTW, do conservatives actually think folks well on the Left love Hillary? They didn't in 2008. They don't now. If a credible, non-Biden candidate would emerge, I would think they have a pretty good shot to beat Clinton at this point.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 2:51 am
by Jungle Rat
What email scandal?
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 8:57 am
by Toemeesleather
that began 40 years ago
Wow, selective (and ignorant) aren't you....not surprised. The two trends that are directly comparable (unemployment trending down/food stamps remaining constant) began 2008-2009, but you go back to the Ford admin to chirp about greed/profits.
Carry on.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 9:09 am
by Dr. Strangelove
Yeah why bitch (or care) about about wage stagnation in America when you can bitch about food stamps instead?
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 4:59 pm
by Professor Tiger
Dr. Strangelove wrote:It's shady as all get-out...but unless something damning gets found in them now that they're being released, it's a tempest in a teapot.
I think the point is Hillary's arrangement ensures that she totally controls all her official emails. She will only release only what she wants to release, and you can be sure there will be nothing damning released. That was obviously the whole point of the arrangement in the first place.
I'm sure the Left isn't wild about Hillary. She and Bill wallowed in financial sleaze for 8 years. They pioneered fund raising huge cash from Buddhist monks and selling sensitive missile technology to foreign governments. The Left is suspicious of big money unless it comes from Hollywood.
I'm not any expert on the psychology of the Left, but my guess is they'll dutifully submit to Hillary's coronation.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 7:55 pm
by Professor Tiger
If a credible, non-Biden candidate would emerge, I would think they have a pretty good shot to beat Clinton at this point.
First off, may JD have mercy on your soul for such talk.
Second, why would the Dem's have second thoughts about Hillary? On the downside, she and Bill are the most crassly corrupt politicians in several generations. But on the upside, they come with their own permanent get-out-of-jail free cards. No matter how low they go, no matter how outrageously they behave, they survive and even thrive in the ethical wasteland that is modern America.
If I was a Democrat, I would bet the farm on the Clintons every time. There is no downside.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 7:57 pm
by bluetick
Toemeesleather wrote:that began 40 years ago
Wow, selective (and ignorant) aren't you....not surprised. The two trends that are directly comparable (unemployment trending down/food stamps remaining constant) began 2008-2009, but you go back to the Ford admin to chirp about greed/profits.
Carry on.
http://wikipedia/GreatRecession/toeisafucking%20dumbass
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2015 8:09 pm
by 10ac
SC Dems give standing ovation to O'Malley...
ISSA: Clinton could face criminal charges...
'Huge gaps' in email record...
WASH POST MONDAY: Will Hillary's experience be liability?
FT: Clinton fatigue...
NYT MONDAY: Bright days for Clinton are darkened...
'Family foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from Middle Eastern countries known for violence against women and for denying them many basic freedoms'...
Developing...
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:31 am
by Professor Tiger
10ac wrote:SC Dems give standing ovation to O'Malley...
ISSA: Clinton could face criminal charges...
'Huge gaps' in email record...
WASH POST MONDAY: Will Hillary's experience be liability?
FT: Clinton fatigue...
NYT MONDAY: Bright days for Clinton are darkened...
'Family foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from Middle Eastern countries known for violence against women and for denying them many basic freedoms'...
Developing...
The MSM is just inoculating her now so that it will be "old news" during campaign season.
in the end, none of that will matter. President Hillary Clinton 2016 - 2024. Book it, Dan-O.
Re: Puterbac News Network and Political Discussion Thread
Posted: Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:39 am
by Toemeesleather
It was supposed to be a carefully planned anniversary to mark one of the most important and widely praised moments in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s political career — and to remind the country, ahead of a likely 2016 presidential campaign, about her long record as a champion for the rights of women and girls.
Instead, as Mrs. Clinton commemorates her 1995 women’s rights speech in Beijing in back-to-back events in New York, she finds herself under attack for her family foundation’s acceptance of millions of dollars in donations from Middle Eastern countries known for violence against women and for denying them many basic freedoms.
No conflict here, taking money from the world center of misogyny while chanting women's rights. Just another day in Clinton world. (and their gobblers)