7 setbacks for the middle class

Jiffy, I'm interested what school you graduated from. Also, are you arguing that if the supply of unskilled workers decreases by, say 30%, and demand for unsilled workers remains constant, that wages will not increase?

What is your position on supply and demand?


Quote

Originally posted by: jillyf
Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
Jiffy, you must have been sleeping during your Economics 101 class. If the supply of unskilled labor is decreased and the demand for unskilled labor remains constant, then pay for unskilled labor will increase.

This is a fact.


It is a fact that that THEORY is taught in Econ 101. I wasn't napping; I graduated cum laude A.B. Economics.


Common sense indicates that traffic in a tunnel will increase until another method of traffic proves more reliable. I.e. "demand" expands to use available "supply." An increase in the "supply of unskilled labor" is unlikely to have any effect at all on wage levels, ceteris paribus.

If the "supply of unskilled labor" decreases, there is no reason to believe the remaining "unskilled labor" will become suddenly (or gradually) more productive. Therefore, there is no reason to believe real wages will rise. There would possibly be some "panic" buying that would produce an uptick. The most likely outcome is a subsequent correction in supply.
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2


The following is a quote from Fox News, not the new head of the IRS:

"The new head of the IRS has apologized to those who suffered because of the agency’s targeting of conservative groups, after he testified before a House subcommittee for the first time."
Fixed!
Quote

Originally posted by: jillyf
If the "supply of unskilled labor" decreases, there is no reason to believe the remaining "unskilled labor" will become suddenly (or gradually) more productive. Therefore, there is no reason to believe real wages will rise. There would possibly be some "panic" buying that would produce an uptick. The most likely outcome is a subsequent correction in supply.



Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot
If the CBO is correct, the supply of labor will decrease, but the demand for labor will stay the same. That should increase wages, a very good thing, and a welcome change from years of stagnant wages.



Well, it's one or the other. I'd bet on the other...that there is a market for labor and wages are directly impacted by both supply and demand. The exact impact is determined by elasticity of demand and substitution effects, but I'd guess most economists agree that there is a correlation between labor supply and wages.

Only issue with Chicoot's assertion is there are a LOT of Discouraged workers on the Sidelines (not in the Labor supply) today that may pick up some of the slack and reenter the workforce, so the Obamacare labor reductions may have more impact on bringing back some of the long term unemployed than increasing wages but I would certainly expect a general increase in wages as millions of additional workers leave the workforce.

Now as to whether these wage gains would be 'real' and lasting or temporary until markets adjust is another topic entirely. After all, 'In the long run we're all dead', right?


Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy Well, it's one or the other. I'd bet on the other...that there is a market for labor and wages are directly impacted by both supply and demand.

This type of analysis does reasonably well when the subject matter is very discrete. I.e. demand is predictable, supply is predictable, quality is uniform, etc. The "market for labor" is the exact opposite. In fact, the words "unskilled labor" are an oxymoron.

This type of analysis can be applied in limited ways to limited circumstances involving labor and wages. But one who places any stock in its predictive power might as well be guided by an "invisible hand."
Catherine Engelbrecht testified at a House hearing that since setting up her conservative non-profit group her 20 year old business had been audited 15 times by various govt agencies. The total number of federal audits prior to setting up the non-profit - ZERO
Total number of those audits that violated the US Constitution, or Federal laws? ZERO.

"There were a few occasions when Capone was pinched. He served nine months for a concealed weapon charge in 1929. And in 1931, Capone was charged with contempt for his failure to appear in court in Chicago for questioning about the St. Valentine's Day Massacre.

Because a federal court issued the contempt citation, the FBI became involved in investigating Capone's activities. This led to an intense, years-long inquiry into his business practices with authorities building a paper trail and looking for witnesses who could testify to his crimes. The FBI worked in conjunction with the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service to dig up dirt on the gangster. Eventually, they found enough to convict him. The check he endorsed, along with testimony from the very few witnesses the feds could persuade to testify, provided enough evidence to put Capone away.

He was ultimately found guilty of evasion for not paying taxes on his ill-gotten wealth. Capone was sentenced to ten years in federal prison and an additional year to be served at in Chicago. While Capone served only seven years, the punishment had the effect of a life sentence. He contracted syphilis and suffered brain damage and insanity from the infection. The year before his death in 1946, Capone's intellect had degraded to that of a 12-year-old's [source: FBI]."


Using govt agencies to suppress free speech is likely unconstitutional & smacks of totalitarianism.

People got their shorts in a bunch of Gov Christie closing down a few lanes on a bridge but this is ok?
Since when has applying for tax exempt status been a form of free speech? Um, NEVER.

Does the job description for the Governor of NJ include the task "Close the GWB because you're angry and sexually frustrated?" Um, NO.

Why weren't you taught how to THINK when you were taught how to write?
Quote

Originally posted by: hoops2
Catherine Engelbrecht testified at a House hearing that since setting up her conservative non-profit group her 20 year old business had been audited 15 times by various govt agencies. The total number of federal audits prior to setting up the non-profit - ZERO
Ms. Engelbrecht did not testify that her business has ever been audited by 15 times, let alone since she started her voter-suppression groups in 2010.

Why is it when you make a mistake it is always in service of conservative positions? Sort of makes it seem like your mistakes are actually lies.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now