Red Mosquito

96583UP wrote:i tried to buy dogecoin but coinbase doesn’t offer it

then i gave up

Bi_3 wrote:Anyone who made 7 figures and didn’t bail because “we need change” is a dipshit

BurtReynolds wrote:

We can't have just anyone manipulate the markets. Only the elites can do that.

spike wrote:so every time a hedge shorts a stock, this Reddit crew - or a similar crew - is going to pull the same gambit? I like the idea, but doesn’t seem sustainable.

Bi_3 wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

We can't have just anyone manipulate the markets. Only the elites can do that.

You cannot remove the human from the loop, so you cannot make markets tamper-proof, and it will be the elites that can afford the top-tier PhDs to figure out where the cracks in the regulations are. BUT, simple rules like "any security owned for less than 24 hours is subject to a 1% transaction tax" would go a long way to leveling the playing field.

Specifically, the CBO estimates that raising the minimum wage would cost 1.4 million jobs, reducing total national employment by 0.9 percent in 2025, the first year in which the full $15 hourly wage would be in effect. Some people's wages would increase, lifting about 0.9 million people out of poverty in the process; the evidence suggests these higher wages would be largely paid for by consumers in the form of higher prices. The knock-on effects to employment, taxation, and various federal programs would raise the deficit by about $54 billion over the next decade.

I am being somewhat hyperbolic when I call this a bombshell; this conclusion is not a shock or much of a surprise at all. You can always argue with the CBO's estimates and models, and at times it's been quite wrong. But it's fairly obvious that substantially raising federal wage requirements would result in some number of employers choosing to employ fewer people, especially in rural areas with lower costs of living where employers are likely to be more sensitive to increased labor costs. Of course hiking the minimum wage would cost jobs.

washing machine wrote:Not exactly a glowing endorsement of raising the minimum wage from the CBO.

https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-0 ... m-Wage.pdf

I'm not well versed in economic theory to really dig in to that report, but I get the gist of it from this analysis.

This is notable, given the unique structure of America's current economic predicament, which has hit younger, less educated, lower earning workers especially hard. As I have previously written, a Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM) analysis of the economic effects of President Joe Biden's $1.9 trillion COVID relief plan—which includes hiking the minimum hourly wage to $15—noted the large amount of research finding that "unemployment has been disproportionately concentrated among lower wage and young workers in specific sectors, e.g., retail and leisure and hospitality." A dramatic hike in the minimum wage would cost jobs in the very same group that is currently suffering the worst effects of the COVID-induced recession.

Backers of the plan might argue in response that the plan phases in a minimum wage increase over a period of years, and would presumably not take hold until well after the current crisis has ended. But that's just another way of saying that minimum wage boosters want to hit today's younger, lower-income workers with a double blow to their prospects—first the recession, and then the minimum wage hike.

Those of you for the minumum wage hike, I assume you know this argument well? If so, what's the counterpoint take?