Comments on: What good is a $10.00 raise … if it then costs you $12.00 more to live?

By: Uncle B

Uncle B — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:34:55 +0000

Sell out of the suburbs and head for the hills and a Victory garden around and eco-home! The uber-rich have run out of coffers to pilfer, they did the corporate raids, they ate real-estate alive, they ran the price of oil, they stole the world’s gold, they even tried to screw Russia, they went to war for the military/industrial complex and huge profits, they sold us SUV’s all the way up to the ridiculously extravagant Hummer(design center = 4 years), they ran the world prices of grain to the point of starvation in some countries, and they poured billions into ‘nation building’ in Iraq for their own profit! We are next, they will find a way, and screw us too! They will die, or kill us preferably, before they give up there horrendously extravagant lifestyles. beware the hungry uber-rich in their private jets and multiple mansions! We are all they have left to eat, and they are insatiable!

By: Ben

Ben — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 05:40:56 +0000

@ Gazzie -
This is simply a reply to your first point.

The basis of your statement is flawed, that it did not say “necessities of life”, merely “necessities”. The “of life” is implied, as it would be redundant and excessive to state it again. This is frequently used in order to shorten and improve the flow of sentences.

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 19:16:34 +0000

What happens if you DON’T get that $10 raise and it STILL costs $12 more to live?

By: TMK

TMK — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:48:21 +0000

@Casandro â€” July 5, 2008 @ 11:22 pm

Sorry Casandro: http://oregonstate.edu/instruc.....nwage.html

“What good is a federal minimum wage raise if it costs you purchasing power?”

As for our devalued curency, that is the result of our horrible and dishonest fiduciary banking system.

By: Rawkstah

Rawkstah — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:41:53 +0000

Wasn’t really shocked to see the knee-jerk, anti-sense posts. It’s common to see today’s public school “educated” kids fail to recognize basic economics. Nevermind the fact that most Americans actually heeded this advice and prospered (failed history class too), they willingly did then what most enviro-fascists wish to impose on us today (ie, recycle, reduce, reuse).

Heard NYC just banned cannolis; take that Hitle…. oh wait, that helped no one win anything. I guess I’ll go plant a Victory Garden anyway.

-Rawkstah

By: ratpack

ratpack — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:01:38 +0000

Inflation and the exchange rate are not the same thing. inflation is a local indicator of how much a dollar buys, the exchange rate is a globe indicator and is a relative comparison between 2 country’s . they can effect each other how ever the current exchange rate is caused more by Differentials in interest rates between the USA and Europe then inflation rates.

By: Casandro

Casandro — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 06:22:56 +0000

Well but not getting a raise does not mean there’s no inflation. For example in the last few years, the value of the dollar dropped from more than one euro down to about 60 cents. I don’t think people got that high raises.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 05:52:07 +0000

There is a lot of confusion here based on the assumption that people will have more money if the wage rate is increased. Raising the wage rate can only increase how much people are paid if there is more money to pay those wages. Otherwise, and increased wage rate will simply cause people to be dismissed. Any sustained, over-all increase in prices requires either that there be a increase in the supply of money, or a decrease in the supply of goods!

By: WDW

WDW — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:58:48 +0000

Correction: date in the image is 1944. Date on the blog is 1945.

By: Casandro

Casandro — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:03:00 +0000

@ratpack
Well actually having a low wage-level is actually a plus for some countries. Now that, for example, people in the US essentially work for free, german companies outsource their labor intensive jobs to the US. One example is BMW, which now let’s people in the US build their cars. Don’t know about the quality, but that’s not really important in that area of the car business.

By: ratpack

ratpack — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:33:30 +0000

there is truth in this article.
Lets put it this way. If the minimum wage was raised so that no one made below 30K a year to get rid of poverty. inflation would run unchecked the price of all goods would rise. Then 30K a year would be the new poverty level. So what good is a $10 raise when it cost you $12 more to live?

By: Daniel

Daniel — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:47:01 +0000

The combination of “printing money” and effecting wage-and-price controls taxes the economy in ways that people feel but don’t recognize as taxes — shortages, waiting lines, and misallocations. Actually, it’s much more economically efficient to overtly tax. And guys like Adam Smith wanted a balanced budget in war-time so that people would recognize the cost of war!

By: Gazzie

Gazzie — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:37:56 +0000

I’m 74 years young and these three previous comments cut me to the bone and I must respond.

To rsterling78… it didn’t state “necessities of life.” It said “necessities” and I and everyone else did without a lot of them… like new clothes (my mom was alyways patching them) and new shoes(my dad put new soles on them) and we didn’t eat steak.

To Blurgle… Yes it was propaganda… but it wasn’t the type that Hitler was espousing. We weren’t “Little Sub-Humans” getting by without necessities… we were regular people helping our country in time of need… and the rich people did live in greater luxury, but if you check you’ll see that they also gave and sacrificed.

To Casandro… We bought war bonds to invest in our country because we knew we had to defeat Hitler in Europe… because if we didn’t… America would be next. Plus, the bonds paid off… look at the

By: Charlie

Charlie — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:08:17 +0000

Actually, it’s kind of backwards from today. Yes, they were asking people to buy war bonds, but in 1945 no one really had doubts as to the ability of the US Govt. to repay debt. It’s actually a pretty amazing thing, they were telling the people not to buy stuff they didn’t need. The exact opposite of what happened during our current war. Also, during WWII the federal income tax on the highest tax bracket was 94%. Not that rich people didn’t find ways to get out of it, of course they did, and they profited from the war as well. But at least they had the decency to admit they *should* pay a higher burden because of their wealth.

By: Casandro

Casandro — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:22:41 +0000

I wonder why anybody should even bother buying war bonds. I mean you have to pay the war anyhow, it’s not like any war ever will bring back some money, except for companies like Halliburton or Blackwater.

So essentially you lend your government money, you have to pay back yourself.

By: Blurgle

Blurgle — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:35:54 +0000

What propaganda. “Remember your place, little sub-human; money and comfort aren’t for people like you. Learn to get by without necessities so your betters can live in greater luxury.”

By: rsterling78

rsterling78 — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 04:18:14 +0000

“Of course, itâ€™s hard to give up the luxuries of life â€¦ and even harder to give up some of the necessities.”

Uh, yeah. It’s really hard to give up the necessities of life. In fact, it’s impossible. That’s why they’re called necessities.