Fake Shemp
Does that mean prices would go up once then we'd have a continuing loop of higher profits and wages?Originally Posted by Chip Monk
3.1. Profits go up.
2. Wages go up.
3. Prices go up.
4. Goto 1.
That's simple economics.
1.
2.
4.
I would have said.
Mebbes we should ask manbacus.
Darth Monk Like.
Yes, I believe it does.The rate of change may vary but the trend would be the same.Does that mean prices would go up once then we'd have a continuing loop of higher profits and wages?
You do not need to see my I.D.
effendi
There's no such thing as :earl: simple economics.
As we're talking about the minimum wage, the idea is that when it goes up or is first implemented, that profits don't go up or down as a direct result.
Prices are altered to absorb the hike.
Whether profit goes up or down is dependent on many other factors such as whether your price hike (which depends upon the number of staff you employ that are affected by the enforced wage increase) is more or less than that which your competitors implement, which will then affect demand for your product and by implication your profit levels.
I plan on beating him to death with his kids. I'll use them as a bludgeon on his face. -
--Good for them if they survive.
Frog Shoulder
BT Rep: +4
Spammer
"there is nothing misogynistic about anything, stop trippin.
i type this way because im black and from nyc chill son "
there is no god
We should spare a moment to reflect on the hardship endured by poor old Roy Blunt (R-MO)......he wants his raise.
Politics Could Scuttle Raising Pay for House Members
By CARL HULSE
Published: January 30, 2007
WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 — The annual raise for members of the House is on the verge of being eaten up in political payback.
Republicans, who were attacked by Democrats in the 2006 campaign for accepting annual raises while not increasing the federal minimum wage for 10 years, say they are inclined to oppose any increase for representatives. And Democrats say they are not likely to enact one on their own, which would open them to attack in the next campaign.
Republican leaders point a finger at the hard-hitting Democratic campaign operation of last year, saying Monday that making the raises a political issue violated a longtime unwritten agreement between the parties.
“It was absolutely understood and agreed to,” said Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the second-ranking Republican.
Mr. Blunt and others said the raises were crucial for members of Congress who are not independently wealthy and must operate two households on the current $165,200 salary. The annual raise for this year was set at 1.7 percent, about $2,760.
source
That's not mentioning all the perks they get above their basic pay for a job they actively sought and spent a lot of money trying to get.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
there is no god
[youtube]wsqprEihjXg[/youtube]
republic party
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
we want your oil!
i want to punch him for every time he said "republic". i do think it's hilarious that the repubs are constantly getting kicked around and caught out spinning shit. ya hear that j2? you should bookmark this post lolololololololol[youtube]wsqprEihjXg[/youtube]
republic party
there is no god
Do you feel the same way every time they say democrat party?
Last edited by vidcc; 02-10-2007 at 08:29 PM.
it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
we want your oil!
if they're doing it just to be annoying, yesDo you feel the same way every time they say democrat party?
we want your oil!
btw
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otPheWE_6YI[/youtube]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks