US on track to borrow most money since 2008 financial crisis: report

LV426 said:
YOUR ASSERTION is that raising the MW kills jobs.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my assertion at all you pathological lying dumbshit. But seeing that you are immune from facts and reality, I won't bother trying to correct your lies.

LV426 said:
That was why I posted that article.

So can you just admit that your original assertion was really a load of horseshit you were repeating because you didn't want to accept new information that undermined it, please?
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Truth Detector said:
So that brings us back to some facts about you; did you attend college and what is your nationality? Or still too big of a cowardly liar and pussy to say?
Click to expand...

Trying to make this personal is the last tactic you have in your bag before totally flaming out with a cavalcade of the same meme over and over.
 
Cypress said:
I am actually amazed the myth that tax cuts generate more revenue and pay for themselves is still being floated around in the rightwing.

It is actually astonishing, because the data is unequivocal and easily available that Republican tax cuts always lead to massive deficits.
Click to expand...

It aint just the right wing.

Lot's of people on the left have brought into tax cuts as well.
 
LV426 said:
This is so hilarious...I fuckin love it.

So before, you argued that it was the dotcom bubble burst that caused the recession, now you use a weirdo link to say Y2K was the cause?

So which was it? Because you've used both as the reason for the recession.

And BTW - recessions don't start mid-quarter. They start on the quarter.

Furthermore, GDP for 2001 WAS STILL POSITIVE, so there's no reason why revenue should have dropped if not because of tax cuts.

If GDP continues to grow, as it did in 2001, revenues should grow as well. Only they didn't grow, they declined.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
LV426 said:
So back in 2014, 13 states raised their minimum wage and all 13 states saw faster job growth than the 37 states that didn't.

So there goes your first stupid argument that raising the MW results in job loss.

Secondly, automation has been happening since the cotton gin. Were robots replacing workers on GM lines in the 80's and 90's because of the minimum wage? No. They were replacing workers because automation is always happening.

Thirdly, all you're doing is making the case for a universal basic income; you can't employ someone in a job that a robot does.
Click to expand...

He think raising the minimum wage hurts Blacks the most.

I've told him several times it's the single most ignorant argument the racist right touts.
 
cawacko said:
Look at what I wrote. I said it eliminates jobs for the those on the margains.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because they then get higher-paying jobs like what happened in Seattle.

So you're here, crying crocodile tears over low wage jobs while ignoring the corresponding increase in employment; both overall like the 13 states that raised their MW in 2014 and in Seattle, which saw a corresponding increase in higher-wage jobs at the expense of low-wage jobs, while also seeing its unemployment rate get as low as 2.8%!

So when you talk about "those at the margins", who are you actually talking about? Because Seattle saw job growth at higher income levels after the MW hike as it saw low-wage jobs decline.

You seem to be saying we should keep low wage jobs around simply for the sake of keeping them around.

Weak sauce.



The UDub study backs that up.
Click to expand...

NO IT DOESN'T.

The part you are leaving out is that there was a corresponding increase in employment at higher wage jobs that came at the expense of low-wage jobs.

That is what the UW study says, fully.

What you do is the very typical Conservative tactic of ripping things out of context, and lying by omission.

You should get that checked out.
 
cawacko said:
I'll repeat. Increased minimum wage hurts those at the margain. That states raised the minimum wage during a period of growth and still had positive employment numbers doesn't disapprove it. Studies have shown for years who it hurts as did the recent Seattle study done by UDub. An argument isn't stupid because you disagree with it. I understand it can be disconcerting when facts get in the way of your preconceived notions.
Click to expand...

It hurts Black people to make more money..........pure ignorance.
 
cawacko said:
Your NPR article doesn't address those on the margains, its talking about the economy as a whole. Do you understand the difference?
Click to expand...

When the MW is increased, you asserted it would lead to job loss.

It doesn't.

Then you tried to pretend that it leads to job loss "at the margins" (whatever that vague phrase means), yet you ignore or deliberately omit that there's a corresponding increase in higher-wage jobs at the expense of low-wage jobs when the MW is hiked.

You left that very important detail out of your entire argument on purpose, didn't you?
 
If the white man has to raise his wages and pay the nigga more.........they will just fire the nigga.


That's the only way raising the minimum hurts Blacks. .....right cawacky?
 
cawacko said:
You resort to name calling each discussion because you get lost. It happened when you didn't understand housing and when you didn't understand unfunded pension liabilities.
Click to expand...

You are the one who got lost here, pal.

You are the one who is deliberately leaving out key details from what you're using to support your argument. And you're doing it for a very specific reason; you're a lying piece of shit nobody who wants to make himself feel more important than he actually is on a fucking anonymous message board.

Maybe sacrificing personal integrity is something you're willing to do on an anonymous forum...I'm not, but you seem comfortable doing it.


you didn't understand unfunded pension liabilities.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't understand it. You screeched about unfunded liabilities, but then suddenly clammed up when pressed for details like...how long are you looking out? What revenue baseline are you using to determine your liabilities? What is the actual liability?

You never answered those questions. Instead, you dodged and danced and Dunning-Krugered your way through a pretty shitty argument, relying on spamming links that don't even answer any of the very simple questions I asked of you.

Delete your account; kill yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top