pacino wrote:
obama derangement syndrome

pacino wrote:except now the politicans and the party they are for is also for it.

TenuredVulture wrote:I'm surprised JH didn't drop a "heuristics" on you.

TenuredVulture wrote:I'm surprised JH didn't drop a "heuristics" on you.

Werthless wrote:Regarding the minimum wage, more important than a raised rate (which will likely hurt employment in the short-term) is to tie it to inflation. But I agree with jerseyhoya, the federal minimum wage should be based off the lowest standard of living state. It's up to individual states to move beyond that if their cost of living is higher.

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote:Regarding the minimum wage, more important than a raised rate (which will likely hurt employment in the short-term) is to tie it to inflation. But I agree with jerseyhoya, the federal minimum wage should be based off the lowest standard of living state. It's up to individual states to move beyond that if their cost of living is higher.

there's nothing magically economically virtuous about that lowest standard of living criterion (partly because the entirety of minimum wage matters is emblematic of the well-nigh-impossibility of genuinely separating politics and economics).

Obama excoriated his opponent in last year’s election as being unfit for office for having such investments. So by Obama’s own standard, shouldn’t Lew be considered unfit for office as well? Obama specifically called the investment Lew held the world’s biggest “tax scam.” Should the man responsible for U.S. tax policy be someone the president says was involved in a “tax scam”? Someone the Democratic Senate Finance Committee chairman says was “feasting at America’s taxpayers’ expense”?

A White House spokesman, Eric Schultz, pointed out that Lew broke no laws and “paid all of his taxes and reported all of the income, gains and losses from the investment on his tax returns.” But last year Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said that while Romney had not technically broken any laws by keeping his money in offshore tax havens, “is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be president of the United States?” Well, is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be secretary of the Treasury?

Investing in the Cayman Islands does not make Lew unfit to be Treasury secretary. But it does make him unfit to be Obama’s Treasury secretary.

Werthless wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote:Regarding the minimum wage, more important than a raised rate (which will likely hurt employment in the short-term) is to tie it to inflation. But I agree with jerseyhoya, the federal minimum wage should be based off the lowest standard of living state. It's up to individual states to move beyond that if their cost of living is higher.

there's nothing magically economically virtuous about that lowest standard of living criterion (partly because the entirety of minimum wage matters is emblematic of the well-nigh-impossibility of genuinely separating politics and economics).

Why don't we just move the minimum wage to $20, since that is what fast food workers in North Dakota oil towns can earn?

Bucky wrote:watched the speech in a luxury bar/restaurant on Wall Street last night

Guess how that went

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Werthless wrote:Regarding the minimum wage, more important than a raised rate (which will likely hurt employment in the short-term) is to tie it to inflation. But I agree with jerseyhoya, the federal minimum wage should be based off the lowest standard of living state. It's up to individual states to move beyond that if their cost of living is higher.

there's nothing magically economically virtuous about that lowest standard of living criterion (partly because the entirety of minimum wage matters is emblematic of the well-nigh-impossibility of genuinely separating politics and economics).

Why don't we just move the minimum wage to $20, since that is what fast food workers in North Dakota oil towns can earn?

why restrict our threshold to silly old national & state borders when it's perfectly obvious we can find some barefoot Senegalese kids who'll do some of that low-wage stuff for a bag of millet, and use their 'wage rate' as our standard?

Do you ever give any of this stuff actual thought, or are you working from some kind of checklist?

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

Bucky wrote:watched the speech in a luxury bar/restaurant on Wall Street last night

Guess how that went

rioting?

Werthless wrote:I must say that Jack Lew having investments in Cayman-based funds is delicious irony.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

I can't wait for the snarky criticisms of Jack Lew from Doll is Mine, JFLNYC, Monkeyboy, and Youseff on this issue.

Obama excoriated his opponent in last year’s election as being unfit for office for having such investments. So by Obama’s own standard, shouldn’t Lew be considered unfit for office as well? Obama specifically called the investment Lew held the world’s biggest “tax scam.” Should the man responsible for U.S. tax policy be someone the president says was involved in a “tax scam”? Someone the Democratic Senate Finance Committee chairman says was “feasting at America’s taxpayers’ expense”?

A White House spokesman, Eric Schultz, pointed out that Lew broke no laws and “paid all of his taxes and reported all of the income, gains and losses from the investment on his tax returns.” But last year Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said that while Romney had not technically broken any laws by keeping his money in offshore tax havens, “is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be president of the United States?” Well, is not technically breaking the law a high-enough standard for someone who wants to be secretary of the Treasury?

Investing in the Cayman Islands does not make Lew unfit to be Treasury secretary. But it does make him unfit to be Obama’s Treasury secretary.