lindseybluth:

i hate spotify ads because i listen to playlists in the shower a lot and there is nothing more startling than being completely naked and suddenly hearing lebron james say “i’ll tell you what makes me thirsty”

tkyle:

Have you heard about this new video tape that kills you when you watch it?

redbloodedamerica:

theconcealedweapon:

redbloodedamerica:

Pretty much.

A higher minimum wage means the working class has more money to spend, which means more demand for consumption and therefore more jobs. A higher minimum wage also means fewer people would need to work multiple jobs. Studies have actually shown that in states with a higher minimum wage, there is less unemployment.

Yes, the old broken window fallacy that by forcing an employer to spend more on wages, you’re somehow boosting the economy by giving a handful of people making low wages a raise.
This assumes many things:
That all the employees will remain hired.
That all the employees will continue working the same amount of hours.
That any new employees will be hired.
That all companies will be able to stay open with such a large cost increase.
That the higher wage expense will not offset expenditures that were dedicated elsewhere in the business and in turn in the economy.
That higher wages will not result in higher prices…especially for businesses that can’t absorb the costs.  This is essentially artificially moving up the price floor, which means we’ve essentially moved the price scale solving nothing.
That increases in the small section of low paying jobs magically increases demands in consumption.
That states with a slightly higher minimum wage actually have that big of an advantage over states with the federally mandated minimum wage.  (Those states generally have a +.01-.03% higher minimum wage, while Obama is proposing a +39.31% increase and nutjobs like Elizabeth Warren are proposing an increase of +106.8%.)
That raising the minimum wage doesn’t negatively affect those unskilled, young workers that hold those positions.
That you wouldn’t hurt millions of workers who currently work for wages above the proposed increases…especially if prices are raised in response.

redbloodedamerica:

theconcealedweapon:

redbloodedamerica:

Pretty much.

A higher minimum wage means the working class has more money to spend, which means more demand for consumption and therefore more jobs. A higher minimum wage also means fewer people would need to work multiple jobs. Studies have actually shown that in states with a higher minimum wage, there is less unemployment.

Yes, the old broken window fallacy that by forcing an employer to spend more on wages, you’re somehow boosting the economy by giving a handful of people making low wages a raise.

This assumes many things:

  1. That all the employees will remain hired.
  2. That all the employees will continue working the same amount of hours.
  3. That any new employees will be hired.
  4. That all companies will be able to stay open with such a large cost increase.
  5. That the higher wage expense will not offset expenditures that were dedicated elsewhere in the business and in turn in the economy.
  6. That higher wages will not result in higher prices…especially for businesses that can’t absorb the costs.  This is essentially artificially moving up the price floor, which means we’ve essentially moved the price scale solving nothing.
  7. That increases in the small section of low paying jobs magically increases demands in consumption.
  8. That states with a slightly higher minimum wage actually have that big of an advantage over states with the federally mandated minimum wage.  (Those states generally have a +.01-.03% higher minimum wage, while Obama is proposing a +39.31% increase and nutjobs like Elizabeth Warren are proposing an increase of +106.8%.)
  9. That raising the minimum wage doesn’t negatively affect those unskilled, young workers that hold those positions.
  10. That you wouldn’t hurt millions of workers who currently work for wages above the proposed increases…especially if prices are raised in response.

(Source: fuks)