The Next President is...

[DosXX]

9 hours ago, ViperMan said:

I must not be understanding something. What am I missing?

It's not that low skill employers are a textbook monopsony, rather that it explains market inefficiencies in the labor market when modeled as a monopsony/oligopsony. People who argue for free market principles in the economy usually agree with US antitrust law companies that were used against anticompetitive companies that were modeled as monopolies/oligopolies but usually have not heard of monopsony. In the same way they were not truly a monopoly (there were still competitors), the low skill wage labor market also is not a pure monopsony. 

9 hours ago, ViperMan said:

It just seems to me that as you lower the wage you're willing to work for, the greater the number of potential employers becomes?

Read more into it beyond 10 min, it's not intuitive at first but it will make sense from a market principles perspective. I'll try here to explain it best:

You can't look at it individually, because the wage for the group determines the wage that gets offered. Say 100 people are willing to work for $5 an hour at Walmart or McDonald's at your local highway town. Now let's say 200 are willing to work for $8. The companies will not offer $5 to 100 employees and $8 to the rest, it must offer $8 to all 200 if it wants to hire all the employees. Let's say each employee makes them $8 dollars an hour. The competitive equilibrium in this case is 200 employees, but they actually make more profit hiring just 100 at $5 (+$300 excess profit). I'm using fixed revenue as apposed to marginal revenue for simplicity just to show how it works, hopefully that's clear enough. But the point is low skill labor markets would take advantage of the people willing to work for much less than minimum wage (which is even more true in immigration heavy country like US) to edge out a profit larger than they could have at the actual competitive equilibrium.

The reason I preface this argument with a self destruct option when employment lowers more than 3% is because I don't expect the general public to understand monopsony theory to justify minimum wage increases, and also because the research is not certain where that minimum wage should be. It will obviously break down at some point; in my example if the minimum wage is set at $9 it would actually lower employment. There is a limit to where it would not affect employment depending on local conditions, but my main point is simply to reject the notion that any increase in minimum wage always decreases employment. 

[pawnman]

You are aware that even low-skill employers like Walmart or McDonald's have people who are making different amounts of money, right?  That not every employee is making minimum wage, and that not every employee is making the same amount as every other employee?

It would be quite feasible for a company with the kind of pricing power you are suggesting to hire 100 people at $5/hr and then 100 more at $8/hr.  Where are the people willing to settle for $5/hr going to go if they are unhappy with the fact their counterparts make more than them?  

[Guardian]

https://m.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-100000-ballots-with-implausible-return-dates_3572942.html

Here’s some widespread voter fraud. If the states can figure it out it goes to the house. One vote per state.

There is a slim chance that Trump can still win.

[Guardian]

I didn’t say that the impeachment investigations and Russia stuff was an attempt to flip the call of the 2016 vote. So we agree on that.

We will never know about the pence vs trump question for the 2016-2020 time frame. Because it didn’t happen. We can argue all we want but it will be just that. And to convince me it would have been better you would have to convince me that Pence would have done a better job and with what ruler we would measure that job since by many accounts the country had unmatched prosperity in the last 4 years covid not withstanding. And let me say it Trump didn’t cause Corona and no Dem has come up with any plan different or better than what was actually executed.

[Homestar]

Widespread voter fraud, like Russian collusion, didn't happen.  But continue to tilt at windmills till your Parlor account is approved by Q.

[drewpey]

46 minutes ago, Prozac said:

A couple things:

Everyone knew this election would be different due to the pandemic. The “blue shift” was predicted long before the election by anyone who cared to ponder the fact that the president’s supporters were likely to vote at the polls, while Biden supporters were far more likely to vote by mail. Pennsylvania law (passed by Republicans) meant that mail in votes there could not even be processed until Tuesday (other states have laws that allowed processing much earlier-hence Florida’s relatively early result). This process was further hampered by the Trump administration’s own hamstringing of the USPS prior to the election. If Trump wants to whine about the process, he has himself at least partially to blame. 
 

Regarding the impeachment: This was in no way an attempt to overturn the 2016 election. Let me repeat that. The impeachment was not an attempt to OVERTURN the 2016 election. If Trump had been removed from office, you would’ve ended up with Pence, not Hillary, in the Oval Office. Think about that for a minute. If the Dems had succeeded, you would’ve had an extremely conservative guy who is capable of acting like an adult human being, who doesn’t tweet a shitstorm every morning, who wouldn’t fire a cabinet member every other day, who is not a pathological liar, and is far less polarizing than the Donald as the POTUS. Do you think Pence might’ve done a better job at unifying the country over the COVID crisis? I do. I’ll say it one more time. Impeachment was not an attempt to overturn an election and removing Trump from office would’ve been a GIFT to Republicans. 

Also...it turns out campaigning across the US telling your followers mail in ballots are a fraud and to not use them...results in fewer mail in ballots for your side.  Imagine that!

The impeachment was really just getting all the Republicans on record to defend all Trump's actions.  It will be politically useful in the upcoming years when all of them claim to have been against him despite carrying his water for 4 years.  Republicans eat their own, and it's only a matter of time before Trump is on the plate.  Just look at McCain, Romney, Bush Jr to some extent, and pretty much any office holder that isn't gushingly supportive of Trump.  My bet is in 10-15 years you won't be able to find anyone who admits to voting for Trump.

[DosXX]

2 minutes ago, pawnman said:

You are aware that even low-skill employers like Walmart or McDonald's have people who are making different amounts of money, right?  That not every employee is making minimum wage, and that not every employee is making the same amount as every other employee?

It would be quite feasible for a company with the kind of pricing power you are suggesting to hire 100 people at $5/hr and then 100 more at $8/hr.  Where are the people willing to settle for $5/hr going to go if they are unhappy with the fact their counterparts make more than them?  

Absolutely, it's a way simplistic explanation to show how the mechanism works, I'm not going to go into all the caveats that make it fall somewhere in the middle in reality such as frictional unemployment, money velocity, experience levels, etc. The company would never hire the 100 more at $8 dollars in this simple example I gave, since that would lower the profit. It would simply leave it at $5 (or somewhere in between when you consider marginal revenue instead of fixed revenue) to maximize profit.

[Seadogs]

9 minutes ago, Guardian said:

https://m.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-100000-ballots-with-implausible-return-dates_3572942.html

Here’s some widespread voter fraud. If the states can figure it out it goes to the house. One vote per state.

There is a slim chance that Trump can still win.

Slim? If the media says slim at worst it is a coin flip. 

[Guardian]

Widespread voter fraud, like Russian collusion, didn't happen.  But continue to tilt at windmills till your Parlor account is approved by Q.

Haha. Well I was just putting an article on here for discussion.

But if you want to make fun of me have at it. Here’s some fodder.. what is Parlor and Q? No idea what you are talking about.

[pcola]

So you informed individuals...please enlighten me on what I’m apparently missing wrr the aforementioned MIT Professor’s video which clearly establishes election fraud occurred in MI. Why is this not a topic of debates here? The case they presented seems overwhelming to me. Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[M2]

10 minutes ago, Homestar said:

Widespread voter fraud, like Russian collusion, didn't happen.  But continue to tilt at windmills till your Parlor account is approved by Q.

Are you talking about 2020, or 2016?  I can't keep up with the constantly shifting liberal narrative...

[pcola]

And also I do appreciate the prior replies to my previous question. Read them all... disagree with most points, but definitely learned a few things that are concerns of people which I hadn’t previously considered. I’m not spending the time here to debate point by point about which ideal is best, but I can see that intelligent people can disagree by a large margin on how to best improve people’s lives.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Prozac]

24 minutes ago, Guardian said:

https://m.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-100000-ballots-with-implausible-return-dates_3572942.html

Here’s some widespread voter fraud. If the states can figure it out it goes to the house. One vote per state.

There is a slim chance that Trump can still win.

The analysis of the publicly available data was conducted by a data researcher, who wishes to remain anonymous, who submitted it first to the Chinese-language edition of The Epoch Times.
 

seems legit 😏

[Guardian]

It was a long video. Cliff’s notes?

[Seadogs]

6 minutes ago, pcola said:

So you informed individuals...please enlighten me on what I’m apparently missing wrr the aforementioned MIT Professor’s video which clearly establishes election fraud occurred in MI. Why is this not a topic of debates here? The case they presented seems overwhelming to me. Am I missing something?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Are you being sarcastic? 

 

That video has substance but is hard to follow and will be dismissed as partisan. Especially because he supports Trump. 

[Guardian]

I hate that argument. Reguardless of the side. It’s wrong because they support Biden or it’s wrong because they support trump. Shouldn’t even be in the discussion

[Seadogs]

Just now, Guardian said:

I hate that argument. Reguardless of the side. It’s wrong because they support Biden or it’s wrong because they support trump. Shouldn’t even be in the discussion

I agree, but that is the world we live in. The video is super dense but shows patterns that are not natural in terms of voting. We will see who comes forward in Dominion. 

[Prozac]

Here’s another conservative talking point that I don’t understand: Only Dems are capable of committing voter fraud? What? While I don’t believe for a minute that there is widespread voter fraud on the scale conservatives continually claim (but never provide evidence to support), it surely exists in much smaller scale scenarios. Does anyone really think that only one side is capable of shenanigans and that the other side is so just and chaste that the thought would never cross their minds? GMAFB. 

[slackline]

Here’s another conservative talking point that I don’t understand: Only Dems are capable of committing voter fraud? What? While I don’t believe for a minute that there is widespread voter fraud on the scale conservatives continually claim (but never provide evidence to support), it surely exists in much smaller scale scenarios. Does anyone really think that only one side is capable of shenanigans and that the other side is so just and chaste that the thought would never cross their minds? GMAFB. 

No, they’re also not capable of violent actions, or getting a convoy together to slow Biden campain vehicles down in dangerous ways on the interstate. Only the left would do that.

You have to remember, the right recognizes hypocrisy on the left, but is blind to it in their own camp. Fairly ironic...

In all fairness, the left is often guilty of the same. I feel like true independents are the only ones looking around wondering what’s happening on both sides.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brabus]

7 minutes ago, slackline said:

I feel like true independents are the only ones looking around wondering what’s happening on both sides.

I think you can replace “true independents” with “80% of the country” and still be accurate. The last several elections have been 10% hardcore base on either side and everyone in the middle doing their best to pick the lesser of two evils while wondering why there are so many lunatics on the fringes. Guarantee there are tens of millions of voters who are not pumped about the candidate they voted for, but see them as a better option than the other guy for varying reasons. 

Edited November 11, 2020 by brabus

[Seadogs]

11 minutes ago, Prozac said:

Here’s another conservative talking point that I don’t understand: Only Dems are capable of committing voter fraud? What? While I don’t believe for a minute that there is widespread voter fraud on the scale conservatives continually claim (but never provide evidence to support), it surely exists in much smaller scale scenarios. Does anyone really think that only one side is capable of shenanigans and that the other side is so just and chaste that the thought would never cross their minds? GMAFB. 

Did we ever say we aren't capable of cheating? I think it was midterms in 2018 or something in NC, Republicans cheated and had to redo the election. 

[Guardian]

Here’s another conservative talking point that I don’t understand: Only Dems are capable of committing voter fraud? What? While I don’t believe for a minute that there is widespread voter fraud on the scale conservatives continually claim (but never provide evidence to support), it surely exists in much smaller scale scenarios. Does anyone really think that only one side is capable of shenanigans and that the other side is so just and chaste that the thought would never cross their minds? GMAFB. 

I’ve never heard of that talking point. Everyone is human and fallible. Where did that come from?

[slackline]

I think you can replace “true independents” with “80% of the country” and still be accurate. The last several elections have been 10% hardcore base on either side and everyone in the middle doing their best to pick the lesser of two evils while wondering why there are so many lunatics on the fringes. Guarantee there are tens of millions of voters who are not pumped about the candidate they voted for, but see them as a better option than the other guy for varying reasons. 

Valid


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guardian]

No, they’re also not capable of violent actions, or getting a convoy together to slow Biden campain vehicles down in dangerous ways on the interstate. Only the left would do that.

You have to remember, the right recognizes hypocrisy on the left, but is blind to it in their own camp. Fairly ironic...

In all fairness, the left is often guilty of the same. I feel like true independents are the only ones looking around wondering what’s happening on both sides.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ironic that you don’t cite any damage, dollars lost or death in your comment. Just an isolated incident of people doing something they shouldn’t on the road. Yet you fail to recognize the issues on your side. Hypocrisy?

[ThreeHoler]

https://m.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-100000-ballots-with-implausible-return-dates_3572942.html

Here’s some widespread voter fraud. If the states can figure it out it goes to the house. One vote per state.

There is a slim chance that Trump can still win.

The Epoch Times isn’t exactly a great news source...

Edited to add: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/technology/epoch-times-influence-falun-gong.html