-
🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪 -
🔥Check Out Muscle Gelz HEAL® - A Topical Peptide Repair Formula with BPC-157 & TB-500! 🏥
How to win the war on poverty
- Thread starter Big Puppy
- Start date
well considering it's seen across the globe for the past couple hundred of years I highly "doubt" that is the reason. Many people in other country's have no access to contraception and here in the states many can't afford it (yes the cost o raising a child is several magnitudes greater).
some societies that are extremely religious and rural have high family sizes, high infant mortality rates still apply in many country's.
some cultures have large families so that their will be children around to take care of the parents in their old age.
Poorer households in contrast have relatively little to gain by limiting fertility so a portion of them have kids when they are young because because they want to.
Welfare, Minimum Wages, and Unemployment
Of the various flavors of government interventionism in our lives, the minimum wage is perhaps the most welcomed. It appeals not only to our innate sense of ?fairness? but also to our self-interest. Its allure may erroneously lead us to the conclusion that because ?it is popular,? ergo ?it is right.?
The more astute proponents of the minimum wage, however, immediately point to the obvious; namely, that an extreme minimum wage ($1,000 per hour) would be unequivocally detrimental. However, the proponents quickly turn to dismissing this fear by asserting that, empirically, no such job loss occurs when the minimum wage is slowly raised. This is akin to arguing that although fire can boil water, a small fire won?t heat it up. The support for this assertion is the oft-cited 1994 study by Card and Krueger[1] showing a positive correlation between an increased minimum wage and employment in New Jersey. Many others have thoroughly debunked this study and it is significant that the original authors eventually retracted their claims.[2]
Youth and Entry-Level Unemployment
The problem with such ?studies? that purport to demonstrate only positive and no negative effects from a rising minimum wage is that it is quite easy to count individuals whose pay went up. What is more challenging, if not impossible, is to count the people that would have been hired but were not. Likewise, offsetting reductions in non-monetary compensation will not show up in a monetarily-focused analysis.
However, empirical economic data is not entirely useless. Such data is more suited to qualitative rather than quantitative predictions (who is affected rather than how much they are affected). For example, basic economics predicts that a minimum wage will necessarily increase unemployment among those with the least experience. Indeed, if we look at the empirical evidence we see exactly that. Looking at the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics we find that the unemployment rate (June 2013) among 16-19 year olds is 24 percent and among 20-24 year olds it is 14 percent.[3] These values far exceed the unemployment rate (6 percent) of those workers with sufficient experience and skills to make them largely immune to minimum wage pay scales, namely 25-54 year olds. People whose productive value is less than the minimum wage are de facto unemployable. They are denied the opportunity to gain experience and skills, and their exclusion from the job market is a net loss to society.
The minimum wage is just another weapon in the arsenal of the misguided progressive trying to ?help? the poor. Their mistake in wielding this weapon is in presuming all workers are similarly situated; i.e., that the vast majority of hourly employees earn minimum wage and that they are uniformly composed of heads of households. In fact the opposite is true. Only 2.1 percent of hourly employees earn minimum wage and of that number over half (55 percent) are 16-24 years old.[4]
How Welfare Brings Down the Asking Wage
So, we know that a sizable number ofminimum-wage earners are not in need of a wage that can support a household. But what of the minimum-wage earners who are? We are told repeatedly that minimum wage is not a living wage, so why are not more minimum wage earners simply starving to death? In reality workers earn two wages: one from their employer and one from the state. For example, someone making the current full-time minimum wage earns $15,000 per year, but they are also eligible for additional government benefits that bring their total remuneration to approximately $35,000 per year if they are childless, or up to $52,000 year if they have children.[5] In fact, earning more does not necessarily help one wean himself off this state sponsored support. As wages rise assistance can often decline so precipitously that even earning $1 more can mean a loss of thousands of dollars in aid. This creates a disincentive for the worker to improve and earn more; the perverse incentive here is that we are rewarding the very thing we are trying to eliminate (low wages). These wage subsidies serve only to pervert the normal incentives present in an exchange between employer and employee. Both the employer and the employee are aware of the subsidies, so each is willing to offer less and accept less rather than demand more and offer more.
At first blush one might conclude the employer is making out like a bandit. But there is no free lunch ? the subsidies have to come from somewhere. Taxes fund these subsidies. So the employer is not necessarily paying less if its taxes fund the very subsidies its employees are receiving. In fact many employers pay more on net. All employers pay taxes, but only some receive the benefit of subsidized wages. This is a net redistribution from one class of company to another. In essence we are forcing high wage companies to pay low wage companies to keep their wages low.
The Minimum Wage Reduces Worker Productivity
So considering that it is established that minimum wage laws and other forms of wage subsidization are detrimental to the stated goal of improving conditions for those regarded as poor, we must address the question perennially proffered by those who believe one?s salvation can only come via the state: ?If not the minimum wage, what then can increase wages?? To answer this question we must understand there are only two possible routes to improving our wages/standard of living. The first method is the unethical route of using force (government) to extract what we want.
The second method, however, is what every rational person would be left with were there no state influence corrupting the incentives that drive their decision-making: improve or augment one?s skills so that they align with those skills currently in greater demand.
Self-improvement through education and/or work experience is the answer to the question: how do I earn more? Government sponsored interference in the market that results in fewer people gaining experience can only serve to frustrate one?s ability to engage in self-improvement. Elimination of the minimum wage is a necessary, although insufficient, first step to improving the economic value of the inexperienced or unskilled.
http://mises.org/daily/6638/Welfare-Minimum-Wages-and-Unemployment
Of the various flavors of government interventionism in our lives, the minimum wage is perhaps the most welcomed. It appeals not only to our innate sense of ?fairness? but also to our self-interest. Its allure may erroneously lead us to the conclusion that because ?it is popular,? ergo ?it is right.?
The more astute proponents of the minimum wage, however, immediately point to the obvious; namely, that an extreme minimum wage ($1,000 per hour) would be unequivocally detrimental. However, the proponents quickly turn to dismissing this fear by asserting that, empirically, no such job loss occurs when the minimum wage is slowly raised. This is akin to arguing that although fire can boil water, a small fire won?t heat it up. The support for this assertion is the oft-cited 1994 study by Card and Krueger[1] showing a positive correlation between an increased minimum wage and employment in New Jersey. Many others have thoroughly debunked this study and it is significant that the original authors eventually retracted their claims.[2]
Youth and Entry-Level Unemployment
The problem with such ?studies? that purport to demonstrate only positive and no negative effects from a rising minimum wage is that it is quite easy to count individuals whose pay went up. What is more challenging, if not impossible, is to count the people that would have been hired but were not. Likewise, offsetting reductions in non-monetary compensation will not show up in a monetarily-focused analysis.
However, empirical economic data is not entirely useless. Such data is more suited to qualitative rather than quantitative predictions (who is affected rather than how much they are affected). For example, basic economics predicts that a minimum wage will necessarily increase unemployment among those with the least experience. Indeed, if we look at the empirical evidence we see exactly that. Looking at the data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics we find that the unemployment rate (June 2013) among 16-19 year olds is 24 percent and among 20-24 year olds it is 14 percent.[3] These values far exceed the unemployment rate (6 percent) of those workers with sufficient experience and skills to make them largely immune to minimum wage pay scales, namely 25-54 year olds. People whose productive value is less than the minimum wage are de facto unemployable. They are denied the opportunity to gain experience and skills, and their exclusion from the job market is a net loss to society.
The minimum wage is just another weapon in the arsenal of the misguided progressive trying to ?help? the poor. Their mistake in wielding this weapon is in presuming all workers are similarly situated; i.e., that the vast majority of hourly employees earn minimum wage and that they are uniformly composed of heads of households. In fact the opposite is true. Only 2.1 percent of hourly employees earn minimum wage and of that number over half (55 percent) are 16-24 years old.[4]
How Welfare Brings Down the Asking Wage
So, we know that a sizable number ofminimum-wage earners are not in need of a wage that can support a household. But what of the minimum-wage earners who are? We are told repeatedly that minimum wage is not a living wage, so why are not more minimum wage earners simply starving to death? In reality workers earn two wages: one from their employer and one from the state. For example, someone making the current full-time minimum wage earns $15,000 per year, but they are also eligible for additional government benefits that bring their total remuneration to approximately $35,000 per year if they are childless, or up to $52,000 year if they have children.[5] In fact, earning more does not necessarily help one wean himself off this state sponsored support. As wages rise assistance can often decline so precipitously that even earning $1 more can mean a loss of thousands of dollars in aid. This creates a disincentive for the worker to improve and earn more; the perverse incentive here is that we are rewarding the very thing we are trying to eliminate (low wages). These wage subsidies serve only to pervert the normal incentives present in an exchange between employer and employee. Both the employer and the employee are aware of the subsidies, so each is willing to offer less and accept less rather than demand more and offer more.
At first blush one might conclude the employer is making out like a bandit. But there is no free lunch ? the subsidies have to come from somewhere. Taxes fund these subsidies. So the employer is not necessarily paying less if its taxes fund the very subsidies its employees are receiving. In fact many employers pay more on net. All employers pay taxes, but only some receive the benefit of subsidized wages. This is a net redistribution from one class of company to another. In essence we are forcing high wage companies to pay low wage companies to keep their wages low.
The Minimum Wage Reduces Worker Productivity
So considering that it is established that minimum wage laws and other forms of wage subsidization are detrimental to the stated goal of improving conditions for those regarded as poor, we must address the question perennially proffered by those who believe one?s salvation can only come via the state: ?If not the minimum wage, what then can increase wages?? To answer this question we must understand there are only two possible routes to improving our wages/standard of living. The first method is the unethical route of using force (government) to extract what we want.
The second method, however, is what every rational person would be left with were there no state influence corrupting the incentives that drive their decision-making: improve or augment one?s skills so that they align with those skills currently in greater demand.
Self-improvement through education and/or work experience is the answer to the question: how do I earn more? Government sponsored interference in the market that results in fewer people gaining experience can only serve to frustrate one?s ability to engage in self-improvement. Elimination of the minimum wage is a necessary, although insufficient, first step to improving the economic value of the inexperienced or unskilled.
http://mises.org/daily/6638/Welfare-Minimum-Wages-and-Unemployment
BULLSHIT walk into any plan parenthood or what ever its called and they will give you a brown bag FULL of condoms. You can also go on google and type in non profit free condoms and there will be dozens of sites that will give your free condoms. When i was dating my girl before we got married she freaked out because she was a virgin and didnt know how many condoms she will need so she went to that plan parenthood place and they gave her 200 condoms for free lol. We had a fucking grocery bag full of them. I laughed my ass off and said lets get to work.
here is my problem with liberals period.. My Grandparents are HUGE liberals. When my mom was growing up they refused to give her money to help fix her car and said as a parent I have to teach you to be responsible and earn your own money and be an adult. However, they are huge in gov't aid welfare and ect.
If you wont give your kids money because you know they will not be responsible with it why are you so quick to give a stranger money who will do the same thing. Not saying everyone on the system is trash, but there are a majority that are. My issue is the liberals have NO urgency to give the poor a better life, to give them a better living condition. They throw money at them to hope they shut there mouths and get votes, but they are not actually helping the poor get off drugs, get off addictions, and manage them selves. The governement needs to stop throwing out free money and start providing programs that are mandatory to help these people. I would rather my tax dollars be raised if i knew it was actually changing something, but the fact they are being raised and the poor is still poor and nothing is changed pisses me off.
If you wont give your kids money because you know they will not be responsible with it why are you so quick to give a stranger money who will do the same thing. Not saying everyone on the system is trash, but there are a majority that are. My issue is the liberals have NO urgency to give the poor a better life, to give them a better living condition. They throw money at them to hope they shut there mouths and get votes, but they are not actually helping the poor get off drugs, get off addictions, and manage them selves. The governement needs to stop throwing out free money and start providing programs that are mandatory to help these people. I would rather my tax dollars be raised if i knew it was actually changing something, but the fact they are being raised and the poor is still poor and nothing is changed pisses me off.
if you live on the west coast or in the north east your right, it's no problem at all. if you live in the south your screwed and it's one of the main reasons why the teen pregnancy rate is so high there.
Planned Parenthood Locations and Health Centers
There are 10 locations ALONE in PA for the Zip CODE were I grew up, which is more than that STATES of Alabama which has 2, Mississippi which has 1 and Louisiana which has 2, Arkansas has 2, Georgia has 5.
In regards to the US there is tons of data on the subject and it's all about income, location and how religious the area is. So basically the kids in the south are screwed while the ones on the NE and W coast which have much higher incomes and availability have more options available to them.
Standard Donkey
Registered
The ones we're better off without.
So the world would be better off without you? You came from a poor background, right?
You should try actually looking at the data vs using your "belief system" because only a small fraction of the US population remains in poverty for the lifespan, most rise up and fall with the changes in the economy when they finally reach the macro level.
And the US did do all the right things many decades ago and in the 70's the US government stopped intervening and forced the US labor force to fend for itself. Now we are going in the complete opposite direction, there is no sustainability to the US economy at best it's a house of cards, built on an economic model designed to concentrate wealth.
Every minute of every day that goes by the US economy under the faced is getting worse and worse for labor and the concentration of income and wealth is steadily increasing, it gets a boost after each recession as they cause permanent wealth transfers up the income ladder.
The war was lost a long time ago when the US headed off in the complete opposite direction it needed to go for long term economic growth and sustainability.
my point exactly i have not looked into what took place in the 70's but today what has your liberal friends in office done to improve the work force or provide a program to retrain workers whose jobs out basically dead due to technology.
Please LAM tell me what are your liberal friends doing to actually help people other then throwing people money? In a text book definition I am very liberal, shit i just gave 500$ to one of my sailors who lost her job and do expect pay back, I just told her to do the right thing and help some one that needs it when shes back on her feet. I personally go out of my way to help people. But throwing money at something does NOT make the problem go away. It is like painting over that rust spot every year hoping it goes away.
You are so blinded by your team that you fail to realize they want the poor to be poor. How the hell do they get into office. If everyone was rich we would have republicans in office. The issue is both partys YES I said both Partys do not want anything to do with the people, they only give a shit about them selves.I would love for my tax dollars to be raised to increase programs for our youth and citizens instead of going to bull shit businesses like Peta.
Thanks for the laugh LAM. Now I know why people are getting knocked up left and right, it's because they don't have easy access to free condoms.
It's not what I say it's what every single economic report across the globe and OECD says. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read them.
The US has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the OECD because we have the highest degree of inequality out of all the wealthy and industrialized country's and because of the lack of options in the religious states.
so the LOL is on you for once again being ignorant because your too lazy to read.
GearsMcGilf
Registered
Are you kidding me? AL only has two Planned Parenthood locations? You may be right, but I'm surprised to hear that because, when I was in my late teens and early 20s, I took two of my gfs there to get BC pills (one for an abortion).
You say that it's all about income, location, and religion. Yet, I've seen to many young black women/girls with 2-3 babies by the time they're 20, who could so easily utilize BC pills or buy condoms. Here in AL, the blacks tend to be more religious than the majority of the white. Yet, 71% of all black kids are born out of wedlock because black men haven't figured out how to put on a rubber and black women seem to be the most promiscuous on earth. If they can afford to pay their cellphone bill, why can't they prevent pregnancy? Sorry, I forgot that they're using those free Obama phones. lol
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
The ones that don't need to die, and may actually amount to something, will take care of themselves.
And I was referring to third-worlders, anyway.
GearsMcGilf
Registered
Yes, you're right LAM. We don't have rubbers here in the bible belt. lol We also don't have abortion clinics either! Actually, I live in Bham, AL and I can drive 10 minutes and run right into 3-4 abortion clinics. In fact, even in the more rural parts of AL, there is no shortage of abortion clinics. There are also rubber dispensing machines in every gas station restroom. Clearly, people have access to BC/abortions if they want it. But, black girls and rural white girls don't seem to want abortions. If they can afford meth and crack, you'd think they could afford rubbers and abortions. So, why do you think they keep on spitting out babies they can't afford to take care of?
I don't know why it is, but when black girls get knocked up, they tend to not get abortions, as well as lower ses white girls. I don't believe it's because they don't have access to BC or abortions. So, please educate us on this O LAM.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
Source (PDF).
Source (PDF).
That's why the primary reason USA ranks so badly in teen pregnancies in the OECD.
Source (for births, except the USA. The percentages are linked to individual source).
The number spell it out quite clearly. But feel free to call those facts racist. Or maybe you can throw up some excuses. You know, anything but acknowledged the facts...
Trying to win the war on poverty is as useless as trying to win the war on drugs. If you want to see how government handouts do nothing, then go to an indian reservation. Not by the casinos but actually into the heart of one. You will think you are in another country.
GearsMcGilf
Registered
How about we stop giving incentives to unwed "mothers" to keep spitting out babies out of wedlock? Call me crazy, but if a [black] crack whore gets a certain stipend for having one baby, then the same [black] crack whore is given an additional stipend for having another crack baby, and yet another, yet another. However, her welfare will be cut if she actually gets married. Perhaps there's something wrong with this system as it perpetuates poverty. I can hear LAM right now screaming that the problem is that the govt isn't subsidizing this cesspool of perpetual poverty enough. But, the problem is, these people will continue to live in generation after generation of perpetual poverty until the govt cuts them off and develops programs to lift them out of this non stop cycle of poverty.
GearsMcGilf
Registered
Perhaps job opportunities and educational opportunities would benefit your people more so than prolonged welfare and extended unemployment benefits. Call me crazy. But, then again, you support a marxist president who wasn't even born in this country and who's trying to destroy it from the inside out. What more can we expect.
GearsMcGilf
Registered
Additionally, we should put time limits on blacks and hispanics, who are to primary culprits who are leeching off the system. I would say, 18 months for both blacks and hispanics, both of which should be required to take drug tests (at their own expense) and be required to show proof that they are looking for employment. The spics, particularly, should be required tp show proof that they're in this country legally. If they can't, they should simply be dropped off on the other side of the border. It will be their problem to find their way home if they don't happen to live in Matamoras or Nuevo Laredo. Fuck them!
I always compare the US to the other wealthy, industrialized country's in the OECD and that ain't Mexico but I will make sure to spell it out for you next time.
What does race and drug use have to do with anything when the same problem is seen across the globe?
teen pregnancy rates are highest in the states with the highest degrees of income inequality and across the OECD the country's with the lowest amounts of inequality have the lowest teen pregnancy rates.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
it's not like I haven't compared the US to the other wealthy, industrialized country's a couple thousand times over the years.
your about a rock.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 51
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
You are the one that said OECD. You did not say, "In the OECD, except Mexico and Turkey."
Also, I clearly showed what the number reason for the high teen-pregnancy is. Which was far more informational that your exclusionary statement. The problem is that American, an OECD country, has so many people from non-OECD countries, and, in the case of Mexico, the bottom of the OECD barrel.
What? I'm about a rock? I can't even guess as to what you meant.
I heard google translate is working on adding LAM to its list of languages.