On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 3:59:32 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:




Your [and my] taxes subsidize the labor costs of the below
living wage through SNAP/food stamps, section 8 housing,
Medicaid/social services, and private donations such as
community pantries/food banks, among other entitlements.
There is also the astronomical cost of sustaining the
unemployable. The consequential societal costs such as
wasted productivity, and police/court/penal costs dwarf the
sustenance costs.


--
Unka' George


You are right. Our taxes subsidize those that do not have well paying jobs. So what. The government should help those that need help.

But is it not cheaper to subsidize those that need help. Or is it cheaper to raise the minimum wage and have fewer low wage earners. And then pay all the expenses of those that have lost jobs.

Dan

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:56:36 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 3:59:32 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:




Your [and my] taxes subsidize the labor costs of the below
living wage through SNAP/food stamps, section 8 housing,
Medicaid/social services, and private donations such as
community pantries/food banks, among other entitlements.
There is also the astronomical cost of sustaining the
unemployable. The consequential societal costs such as
wasted productivity, and police/court/penal costs dwarf the
sustenance costs.


--
Unka' George


You are right. Our taxes subsidize those that do not have well paying jobs. So what. The government should help those that need help.

But is it not cheaper to subsidize those that need help. Or is it cheaper to raise the minimum wage and have fewer low wage earners. And then pay all the expenses of those that have lost jobs.

Dan
======================

IMNSHO a most necessary first step is to force the total
labor costs back onto the employer's books so it will be
factored into the "register" prices such that the "free
market" can begin to again operate. [One distortion is that
employer's FICA is not collected on the value of the labor
subsidies.]

As it stands, the actual/total costs of increasing amounts
of goods and services are unknown.

Subsidized labor is only a part, albeit an apparently
important part, of the hidden subsidy system. Other [hidden]
drains on the economy are tax preferences such as capital
gains and "carried interest," non-taxed employer provided
health care benefits, residential mortgage interest
deductibility from taxable individual income, municipal bond
interest income exclusion from federal taxes, massive
commercial tax abatements and tax increment financing
schemes, Ex-Em bank guarantees, etc.

As it stands no one can calculate, or even plausibly
estimate, the actual direct revenue losses, and the
consequential losses because of the economic distortions and
mal allocation of capital, thus alternatives cannot be
rationally evaluated, however I do suggest that subsidy of
labor costs for marginal dead-end employment is most
unlikely to an optimal use of tax payer money.

One suggestion is to require the individuals "stuck" in
these jobs or "unemployable" to attend paid basic
literacy/numeracy and urban survival skill [including money
management] classes, i. e. "a hand up, not a hand out.".


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:56:36 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 3:59:32 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:




Your [and my] taxes subsidize the labor costs of the below
living wage through SNAP/food stamps, section 8 housing,
Medicaid/social services, and private donations such as
community pantries/food banks, among other entitlements.
There is also the astronomical cost of sustaining the
unemployable. The consequential societal costs such as
wasted productivity, and police/court/penal costs dwarf the
sustenance costs.


--
Unka' George


You are right. Our taxes subsidize those that do not have well paying jobs. So what. The government should help those that need help.

But is it not cheaper to subsidize those that need help. Or is it cheaper to raise the minimum wage and have fewer low wage earners. And then pay all the expenses of those that have lost jobs.

Dan

Heads up Dan...raising the minimum wage has ALREADY put a bunch of
people on unemployment..with hundreds of thousands more to go.

And you think this is going to be a good thing??

On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:23:57 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:


One suggestion is to require the individuals "stuck" in
these jobs or "unemployable" to attend paid basic
literacy/numeracy and urban survival skill [including money
management] classes, i. e. "a hand up, not a hand out.".

Excellent suggestion!!!

Gunner

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 6:41:46 PM UTC-4, Gunner Asch wrote:

Heads up Dan...raising the minimum wage has ALREADY put a bunch of
people on unemployment..with hundreds of thousands more to go.

And you think this is going to be a good thing??

I think that the federal minimum wage ought to be a low level. A level that is reasonable for states with low cost of living and low wages.

The more prosperous states should have a state minimum wage. As it is now the high cost of living states want a high minimum wage to raise the labor costs of low cost of living states. New York is losing population because of their high tax rates and high cost of living.

Dan

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 6:45:09 PM UTC-4, Gunner Asch wrote:

One suggestion is to require the individuals "stuck" in
these jobs or "unemployable" to attend paid basic
literacy/numeracy and urban survival skill [including money
management] classes, i. e. "a hand up, not a hand out.".

Excellent suggestion!!!

Gunner

It is a good suggestion for helping those who will benefit from help. Unfortunately there are a good many that are not able to benefit.

And then there are those that are able to con the system. I have a friend who was a draftsman. His hobby was caving. He lived in a trailer and was not married. He was laid off from a drafting job and then lived on unemployment. And I think he went to a federal training program to became a machinist. So he just did a lot of caving and did not want to find a job. When all the bennies ran out , he went back to working as a draftsman. He could have easily gotten a drafting job, but just took the opportunity to go caving. He said the federal training program was filled with those who did not want to learn.

Dan

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 18:43:20 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 6:45:09 PM UTC-4, Gunner Asch wrote:

One suggestion is to require the individuals "stuck" in
these jobs or "unemployable" to attend paid basic
literacy/numeracy and urban survival skill [including money
management] classes, i. e. "a hand up, not a hand out.".

Excellent suggestion!!!

Gunner

It is a good suggestion for helping those who will benefit from help. Unfortunately there are a good many that are not able to benefit.

And then there are those that are able to con the system. I have a friend who was a draftsman. His hobby was caving. He lived in a trailer and was not married. He was laid off from a drafting job and then lived on unemployment. And I think he went to a federal training program to became a machinist. So he just did a lot of caving and did not want to find a job. When all the bennies ran out , he went back to working as a draftsman. He could have easily gotten a drafting job, but just took the opportunity to go caving. He said the federal training program was filled with those who did not want to learn.

Dan
===================
Indeed, but no solution [short of forced labor/re-education
camps, which are expensive to run and most likely not cost
effective in the aggregate] will be 100% effective. The
hard data and empirical studies are lacking to "prove" the
point either way, but educated is always better than
ignorant.


--
Unka' George

"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"

-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"

On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:44:04 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 17:23:57 -0500, F. George McDuffee
wrote:


One suggestion is to require the individuals "stuck" in
these jobs or "unemployable" to attend paid basic
literacy/numeracy and urban survival skill [including money
management] classes, i. e. "a hand up, not a hand out.".

Excellent suggestion!!!

Yes, wonderful. But because _attitude_ plays so big a part in dead
end jobs, how about some more facets?

1) Enforced use of the English language/reading/writing. (Many of
these folks are illegals. They were supposed to be vetted before being
allowed into the country, but that's no longer the case. Also, inner
cities have allowed Ebonics and Spanglish to rule whole areas.
Bilingualism (and other Liberal cluster****s) has screwed up schools,
teachers, and students and failed to make much of a dent.

2) Mandatory drug/alcohol testing for any Gov't employee or person on
welfare or other form of dole, including unemployment. (This will help
clean things up from both sides)

3) Videotape class "incidents" so troublemakers can be dealt with
properly. One bad egg can screw up an entire classroom if they're not
handled promptly. If they don't want to learn, toss them out on their
asses and let them fend for themselves. Limiting teaching to those
who actually _want_ help increases their chances and benefits society.

--
My desire to be well-informed is currently
at odds with my desire to remain sane. --Sipkess

On Tue, 04 Aug 2015 15:40:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 13:56:36 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 3:59:32 PM UTC-4, F. George McDuffee wrote:




Your [and my] taxes subsidize the labor costs of the below
living wage through SNAP/food stamps, section 8 housing,
Medicaid/social services, and private donations such as
community pantries/food banks, among other entitlements.
There is also the astronomical cost of sustaining the
unemployable. The consequential societal costs such as
wasted productivity, and police/court/penal costs dwarf the
sustenance costs.


--
Unka' George


You are right. Our taxes subsidize those that do not have well paying jobs. So what. The government should help those that need help.

But is it not cheaper to subsidize those that need help. Or is it cheaper to raise the minimum wage and have fewer low wage earners. And then pay all the expenses of those that have lost jobs.

Dan

Heads up Dan...raising the minimum wage has ALREADY put a bunch of
people on unemployment..with hundreds of thousands more to go.

Mom's Liberal Bay Area paper had an article touting the massive
success Washington has had with its $15 mininum wage law. The last
sentence told it all, though, when they described having to wait for
more data to come in before they can give out any major awards. The
article totally overlooked the part about prices at one restaurant
-doubling-, while praising the "no tip necessary" aspect, quoting that
"all our customers are happy with it." Uh, yeah...sure they are.


And you think this is going to be a good thing??

Hey, he's Dan. (plonked long ago here)

--
My desire to be well-informed is currently
at odds with my desire to remain sane. --Sipkess