@El3ctricPenguin Not at all. I was being sarcastic. Try to have roads to drive on with out taxes. lmao or schools. Or the Military that protects us. or firefighters to save us. or parks for our children to play in. Or .. anything that you see around you.
Cities like Charlotte (i've been there) and other sunbelt cities are "can do" cities with leaders whom cut pass the social bullshit and get things done and the same is working for Greenburgh and Spartansburgh South Carolina (where BMW's come from) and this is all really due to the fact Sun Belt Cities don't have the oligarchy government of a city like Cleveland or Buffalo and the folks of Detroit proper just flat out get what they deserve as they descend into the 3rd world
yo, ridiculous high-lights. ReasonTV I especially like the beginning =) Could you imagine that I trained enough to start dunking! I just used the the nba exercise course over at (50 inch vertical [dot] com) and did it in only 2 months!
Lessons From LeBron: What Clevelanders Should Really Be Pissed About jpsztqpmxqfp fgjfviuudzmzc #ReasonTV
I'm sure LeBron James was a liberal when it was convenient, but now I'm sure he understands basic economics, so you see it's not the lack of understanding it's that most liberal's dont care about basic economics.
This is capitalism at work, self interest is not bad. LaBron should do what is best for him, not for you. And you should do what is best for you too.
And WTF is wrong with people? The sky is falling around you and you are worried about LaBron? Seriously, fix your freaking crumbling hole or abandon it like the other half of the population has
That's right! If Cleveland wants to turn around, they better get with it, LeBron is gone & he's not the savior of Cleveland. The people of Cleveland can be the saviors of Cleveland if they invest in their city and elect officials willing to work hard for them, not "themselves".
So let me get this straight. He did not leave for any self interest reason or anything like that, he just has no loyalty and left to spite you? Is that correct?
If the entire Cleveland economy is based on LaBron then there is a serious problem!
Yeah, ReasonTV is a complete joke and propaganda tool when it comes to economics. It's nonsensical to believe that he actually left because of high taxes. Remember, Lebron is going to South Beach.
Its 'nonsensical' to think that someone would move to save millions of dollars of their earnings? How does that even sort of make sense? People will drive across town to save a few pennies on a loaf of bread, of course someone with millions would move to save millions. The fact that he could save money on a beach is just extra whipped cream on his freaking pie!
But whatever the case, Cleveland sucks, it is a whole that should be filled in with road debris, I would move too!
Did Lebron ever say he was moving because of high taxes?
Also, Lebron is taking a pay-cut by switching teams, so he isn't going to be making that much by moving. He's moving to South Beach. Need more be said?
This is nothing but an ghoulish opportunity for Libertarians to put words into Lebron's mouth to push their agenda.
from the narrator 'Did LaBron leave for more money? No.'
Point is he left because Cleveland sucks, it has for half a century and has only gotten worse.
My point was that it would make sense for him to leave for lower taxes even if he took a pay cut first. I've done it in Penn. I left one job for a lower paying one because that county did not tax me so in the end I made more with a lower salary.
And Oh No! that ghoulish Libertarian agenda: Leave us alone! So scary.
lower taxes means more jobs and better economy. thats always been the case, the only people who like to raise taxes are greedy politicians who want to make even more money at the cost of the poor peoples jobs and well being. thats why cities like detriot and cleveland are in ruins because the people in charge raised the taxes way too much and it killed the city.
@ihmen Politicians pay is capped, raising taxes has no fiscal benefit to politicians, in fact it's often bad for them in general because it makes them look bad politically. Also we have some of the lowest taxes in our country's history and our economy has collapsed so what you're saying doesn't make any sense.
@jetrpg22 Having higher taxes has really nothing to do with increased corruption. In fact the lower taxes are the more CEO's tend to take out for personal bonuses that are then used to lobby congress for lower taxes and deregulation. Sorry but your libertarian fiscal conservative buddies have been gypped
This will give you a more broader picture of our economic system.
As for sports, it's all a scam to get the Hard working poor to spend they're paper money or credit on junk and crap from all these organizations, so people can play the worshipping game over and over and over again.
Wake up everyone, Reality isn't what it seems. Our Entire monetary system is AN ILLUSION FOR CONTROL AND MANIPULATION
ROFLMAO! I'll pretend to take your comment seriously long enough to respond.
Reason is not exactly what I would call 'Republican' - Tact is that you have no clue what you are talking about, Dem states are bankrupt, period. Some Repub states fare only slightly better. But those that make money move to where they are allowed to keep it, duh. People who make money provide jobs as well. You will never get a job from a poor person, at least not a real one.
My point is, us americans all have our individualistic opinions that we claim noone else (or at least our public officials) understand basic economics, all we ( the public) seem to do is complain about how everyone else is doing it wrong. when are we going to stop blaming others? You are the problem, i am the problem.. all of us sitting at home on our fat, lazy, behinds, yelling at the stupidtube and blogging about of lack of satisfaction with gov't officials..
lol, i love capitalism... and since all of the ppl here point thier fingers at fed and liberals and whatever else, my question is .. why don't you (such as individuals like sugarkang or hawkermustang) run for office since you have the answers and noone else does, u can fix all the prolems with your all mighty knowlegde on how economies should be ran.
---------------------out of room, continued on next post--------------------------
Because the rest of the politicians who are bought would push them out of the party, have you seen what the GOP and FOX did to Ron Paul when he ran?
He was the only candidate who predicted, down to every last detail, not only what would happen, (the collapse), but more importantly, how. Detail by detail. And it happened exactly how he said it would.
Ron Paul understands, and he did run for office. The problem?
Yup. Using Lebron for a political message just doesn't mix. People are pissed about Lebron not because Cavs lost their economical hero but because of other various reasons such as jumping onto the bandwagon, tantalizing his fans, the hypocrisy of Lebron's tattoo, etc. Plus, Lebron is not leaving for the same reasons as many other people who left Cleveland.
Ohio is a shit stain as are all dem run states....Take your cash and hide it Lebron ,dont let those greedy treasonous commie progressive insurgents near it
This video is 100% common sense, filled with solutions that would return the US to some form of prosperity and liberty, and it will be railed as racist, cruel, uncaring, etc., by the progressives who are addicted to big government and high taxes. Our enemies are not in afghanistant people, they are here all around every single one of us...
how about this: who gives a flying shit!! people are loosing their homes, dont have enough money to feed their familys, we are currently at war in afganistan and our children are getting wounded and killed... and you worry about this asshole changing teams? this is why other country's look at the u.s.a and laugh their ass off at us. Americans are so obsessed with the latest and greatest gagets and shit like this report that we all have lost real focus.. i truly feel sorry for us in the yrs ahead
Florida makes up for letting Lebron off the tax hook by raising various forms of consumption taxes that burden the middle class and poor. Believe it or not, Florida is still broke, but a tag and registration will cost you 500 dollars. Who is that going to negatively affect as a percentage of income?
I had a journalism teacher that was from cleveland and talked about how bad it was (and how the people in my class couldnt understand) but she would always bring up how LeBron was the only hope in that city
@znirich: A teacher who views any athlete as a kind of savior is obvious unequipped to teach. Athletes have a limited effect on society (other than playing in taxpayer provided venues). Ever hear of a business moving to a city because of
a team let alone a single athlete. Want proof? Just look to the Bronx around 170th
Street between Jerome Ave and the Concourse barely 10 blocks from Yankee Stadium-90 years of tradition-see the prosperity. What did she teach standards of modern journalism?
@MusicEqualsMemories Oh, i know she was a Terrible terrible teacher. I'm not really sure what that class was suppose to be about maybe a bit of historical context, because we did talk a bit about past journalist and news mediums newspapers, tv, radio. It was pointless enough but then several classes she just make appeals to emotion about the healthcare legislation at the time it was still pending. She once even said that the bill was only 100 pages long and written in plain english .
@MusicEqualsMemories .... continued. she would babble on about non bias journalism and then make the most bias statements. I also felt that on a number of occasions she took other philosophical views out of context
I'm sure LeBron James was a liberal when it was convenient, but now I'm sure he understands basic economics, so you see it's not the lack of understanding it's that most liberal's dont care about basic economics.
@sugarkang It's not liberals, it greed and silly thiniking that weakness and bad behavior should be rewarded. Back in 1970 ALL of the USA was running sky high. We had just gone to the Moon and our industry was second to none.
Want to improve the economy? The high paying industrial jobs have to return. Let's say NO to allowing low wage imports into our country and bankrupting all of us. There is no way any of us could compete with a $2 a day wage slave in China.
@Trapster99 "The high paying industrial jobs have to return." Oh hell, why don't we just pay high prices for everything then. Raise the minimum wage to $50 so that everyone in McDonald's gets paid more than teachers. The problem IS liberals like you that think if rich people would just pay for poor people, everything would be alright. You need to understand basic economics. I'd start with Thomas Sowell.
Maybe you should research disposable income before asserting that someone else needs to learn basic economics. The minimum wage exists for reasons other than ethics.
@TheAtheistAllegiance I suggest Milton Friedman on minimum wages. YouTube it. Educate yourself. The minimum wage exists at the DETRIMENT to poor communities. This is at at economic level AS WELL AS an ethical level. Economics is your friend. GET ACQUAINTED HIPPY.
I've heard Milton Friedman's incoherent rants about the minimum wage being racist. The problem is that the economic data doesn't back up what he asserts.
Calling people hippies isn't much of an economic argument, nor is your argument from authority fallacy.
@TheAtheistAllegiance "the economic data doesn't back up what he asserts." Uh, he was a world renowned, nobel prize winning ECONOMIST. You are a fucking joke. LEARN SHIT BEFORE YOU SPEAK
Exploitation of a labor surplus isn't ethical either. But as you stated, it isn't mainly because of ethics, but rather economics. However, I get the feeling that you don't see it that way.
@TheAtheistAllegiance You can't exploit someone when there's a consensual agreement. Wages are determined by the free market. Not all jobs are worth minimum wage, but if they are worth more, employers don't need to be told to pay for them. We don't need wage floors for doctors, lawyers, ceos or scientists. The reasoning behind minimum wage would lead us to suggest that we should, or else they would be "exploited." ....
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...If I offer a job for 1 penny an hour, nobody will take it. To get someone to take the job, I'll have to raise the wage until at least one person wants to take the job over nothing, or over any other job he could get. Further, I may not want the first person willing to do the job. So I may raise the wage even more to get someone with the requisite skills to do the job. If he can get a better deal elsewhere he will take that other offer, and he should....
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...Now if you had in place a minimum wage, then every single job that has a market wage below that wage floor will now be out of a job or getting paid more than what their labor is worth in the marketplace. Some companies will pay them more, because they need the job done. Others will fire employees and delegate the work to other employees. This is why it is unethical and illogical. It prevents two consenting parties from making a contract that benefits both of them.
People will take low pay because they have to eat. There is a labor surplus, which drives wages down. However, companies already employ all the people they need to, so job creation will not be a result of minimum wage removal due to diminishing utility of labor. Instead, people will just receive lower pay, which will result in less spending, which will lead to macroeconomic deflation and job loss.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Like I said before, "need" isn't independent of one's self interest. If someone needs to eat, they still won't waste hours of their day and labor working for a penny an hour if there are better ways to make a living. The whole idea behind a market wage is that the supply meets demand. There is never such a thing as a labor surplus. In a free market, there should be virtually zero unemployment. Further a company will never stop hiring because they have all they need...
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...A company would rather expand as much as it can to maximize profit. If they have he money to do so, they will always try to expand their business and if they're able to, they will hire more people. If you restrict the free market with wage controls you're going to have less employment, because it's more expensive to employ certain workers. While everyone having more money will obviously drive the economy, restricting the market in this way just hurts it. What you...
Also, when the poor have a higher income, unlike the rich that save a large portion of their income, they're going to spend the money on goods and services, so businesses will ramp up production to meet demand, which results in job creation. You're only looking at immediate microeconomic outcomes, rather than the long term macroeconomic outcome.
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...get instead is more poor people and more unemployed people. Money doesn't come out of thin air either. If you are paying low skill employees more to do the same job they would do for less, you're taking money from some other part of the business, which makes it harder for them to expand and hire more people. Paying people to put the money back in the business does not create growth. You're just moving wealth around, as opposed to creating it.
You're leaving out disposable income within an economy. Also, supply won't meet demand, and there will always be a labor surplus unless every business is an economy of scale. However, that isn't the case.
The consensus of data has shown that a minimum wage actually lowers unemployment. This is because resources are allocated to people who spend their money rather than save it. Without the rise in demand, businesses won't employ more people due to diminishing marginal utility.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Where is the "Consensus" of data that demonstrates minimum wages lower unemployment? Not to mention what gives the State the right to dictate what a private company does with it's payroll? That is a matter between the employer and employee.
A quick Google search will bring up numerous sources that back up what I say.
The State is a tool of the people. If the people wish to have higher wages because the Free Market isn't accomplishing that goal, then that is what should happen. Market wages aren't socially acceptable, nor economically acceptable in the long run, so it makes sense to implement a wage floor.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Well I have googled a number of resources that say the opposite. Considering that a nation like france has a high minimum wage and regularly high unemployment, it would seem the theory is flawed if not fallacious.
The ideal state is a tool of the people, but most states are too corrupt, bloated and inefficient to dynamically meet the market demands for labor and goods. Market wages are not 'socially acceptable'? Says whom?
I actually conceded that the minimum wage reduces unemployment. I was mistaking this subject for another that I had researched earlier on. When I looked through a few sources, I found the effects of minimum wage were mostly neutral on employment levels.
New Zealand has a higher minimum wage than France I believe, yet relatively low unemployment. Canada also has less unemployment than the US, yet has a substantially higher minimum wage, indicating minimal effects on employment.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Loans give people access to resources faster than they normally would be able. If the loan taker repays on time, it is a win/win. The Lender makes money, the taker gets a home (or something), the bank saver gets interest. When we see the government, as it has, guaranteeing high risk loans not only does it artificially drive up the cost of homes, we get the crisis that we now have because those loans were bad because the banks didn't assume any risk.
My point was that there isn't a permanent rise in demand from loans. A person who takes a loan out may be able to buy something he/she normally wouldn't, but once repayment on the loan begins, that person will have less disposable income, which will lead to less spending. I'm not arguing against lending, I'm just saying a permanent rise in demand would have to come from a permanent rise in income.
Now remember, the minimum wage causes a rise in demand because the poor have a more disposable income, which they will spend. By removing the wage floor, the rich will only pocket the money - not spend it - because they have already spent all the are inclined to. That excess of money gets saved, thus there is no rise in demand, so business owners will not increase production.
Why would they even do so without a necessary rise in demand? How do you account for this?
@TheAtheistAllegiance That assumption makes no sense. Even if the rich employer is hurt less by paying a higher wage for their employees they will definitely feel it and it's ridiculous to say they won't. If your presumption were true, we wouldn't need a minimum wage, because an employer would not be rational enough to want to pay a market wage and instead would be willing to pay much more since it's no skin of their nose. What actually happens is that a rise in wage does affect an employer.
Well, if one employer does it, while others don't, he/she will be at a significant disadvantage. Micro-economically, a wage floor is not beneficial, but macro-economically, it certainly is. This is why if all businesses have to abide by a wage floor due to government sanction, it is very beneficial to the overall economy.
Look up the patterns of unemployment correlating with a rise in minimum wage.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Look despite already knowing that there is a strong correlation between higher minimum wage and unemployment I decided to make good on your request and I am not surprised in the slightest. Almost ever single link that pops up is arguing that minimum wage creates higher unemployment. Now given that's not the basis for my conclusion, I'm just merely pointing that out since that is where your proof supposedly is. Furthermore, your theory still doesn't make any sense.
You're actually mostly right about the minimum wage. I must have mistaken it for something else I had done previous research on. However, I did find that the negative effects were minimal, and the most adverse results weren't directly related to overall unemployment. Employment levels show to have been minimally affected by changes in minimum wage either way they went.
The CPI has also shown to be affected very little by increases in the minimum wage.
@TheAtheistAllegiance I guarantee you that if you add a $1,000 cost to a business you will see that $1000 cost spread to the consumer. Low skill workers may have higher wages (the ones that still have jobs), but the cost to the businesses should virtually wipe out any intended spending on the part of the minimum wage workers. You seem to think a business will sit back and accept higher costs if they can avoid it. They won't and they don't.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Do you think that Rich people hoard their gold in giant vaults? Any money that is not spent or taxed by the rich, like anyone else, goes into banks where it is loaned out. Unless of course the taxes are so high that the person is inclined to store their money offshore.
A rich man may save money by paying less, but a person is free to take that job or not. Minimum wages ensure that the least skilled workers have the most difficultly getting work.
Those savings may be loaned out, but it eventually has to be paid back. In the end, that money isn't being spent at businesses, but instead sitting in a bank account.
People aren't all too free to not work, for they will not be able to comfortably live unemployed for long.
Also, the minimum wage helps the lesser-skilled to find work because unemployment goes down with the introduction of a minimum wage.
@TheAtheistAllegiance Of course loaned money is spent at businesses, what else do people borrow money for? The bank takes a chunk of the interest paid and pays out interest to the money saver. The only hitch is, again, high taxes, which gives the incentive to the saver to keep money offshore or 'hidden'. As for minimum wage "helping" the poor, watch watch?v=7DS0XXFdyfI
The point is that for the few months that loan is out, there is more spending at businesses; however, the next few months when the loan is being paid back, there is less money being spent at businesses, which leaves that person's overall consumption at about the same in the end.
@TheAtheistAllegiance What do you propose as the alternative? People still spend when they are paying back a loan, lest they would starve. If people were paid triple the minimum wage, even 10X they would still need to save for a home, a boat, whatever. So during that period of saving, how would that not be the same as the period as paying back a loan, only instead of saving for 20 years and eventually getting into a home, you get into a home now and pay it off over 20 years.
@TheAtheistAllegiance When you have higher minimum wage, you have higher unemployment. Whatever benefit a few extra dollars per hour to a worker does for the economy is adversely affected by those now out of a job. If your theory is correct, then communism would have brought unprecedented prosperity. What a wage floor does is take capital away for another productive use. We can simply look at the Great Depression and see that the wage controls did more to hurt than to help.
A wage floor only helps to produce capital because it sparks a rise in demand. This encourages investment to expand activities to meet the rise in demand, which requires more workers and additional capital - not less.
It's a matter of shifting money from savings accounts into the hands of those who spend it at businesses, which benefits the economy in obvious ways.
@sugarkang See, something is wrong with the way we talk to each other in America these days. Did I say a thing about paying McDonald's workers 50 bucks an hour? No. I said the high paying industrial jobs MUST return. We have to start building the high quality finished goods that other people want to buy....we did that 40 years ago.
@sugarkang it is not a matter of rich paying for poor, it is a matter of everyone supporting their gov't (you seem to be fixed on the rich paying for the poor and missing the whole picture- and by your comments you seem a bit hostile about it). I would not be supprised if you were not even close to being wealthy, just hooked blindly to your values of capitalism and the american dream, and blame the fact that you have not accomplished it because a portion of your taxes goes to supporting welfare
@eimajism poor people are poor because they have no concept of money management. 60% of NBA retirees go broke within 5 years. Same with Lotto winners. It doesn't matter how much welfare we give poor people. They will squander all of it. I would support welfare if it actually helped poor people lift themselves out of poverty. Unfortunately, handouts don't help people. Teaching them responsibility does.
@Trapster99 So you want protectionism. That hasn't hurt this nation before has it? Oh wait...I think they tried that right before the Great Depression with the Smoot Hawley Tariff. If you want to improve the economy remove economic restrictions.
@Thorbie I want the US workers to be protected from the Slave Workers of China. Period. Right now the get rich quich scheme is to produce something, anything, in China for a fraction of what it costs to produce it in the USA. Then send those goods to the USA, the difference in production costs vs. sale price = Huge profit. It works for a time but bankrupts the country in the process. Look at what Japan did post WWII, they kept US products out and exported to the USA and boosted economy
@Trapster99 What you are talking about is protectionism. Corporations manufacture products outside the nation, because our labor costs are artificially high. Wage controls, and union benefits make it more expensive to hirer US workers. Free trade lifts workers in poor countries out of poverty and also benefits American consumers w/ cheaper products. Everyone wins, but those who somehow feel entitled to higher pay for the same work. Unions bankrupted GM, why let them bankrupt the rest of the US?
@Thorbie Yes, I am for the protection of the American Worker and American standard of living. My Grandfather came to this country alone, with a few coins in his pocket in 1906. He went to work in a factory, worked damed hard and bought a house, car, raised 4 children and sent two of them to college. Labor costs in the US 'artificially high'? Prove that. Ya think because someone in China will do the job for $2 a day means US pay is artificial?
@Trapster99 Some of the stuff for sale at Wallmart is produced in factories run by the Red Army of Communist China....using, yes, Slave Prison Labor. Ya know, folks put in those jails because they had the audacity to believe in something called GOD; and other such 'crimes'. You still think Free Trade is FAIR TRADE? Think again, Free Trade is SLAVE TRADE. 40% Tarriff on all goods coming out of China.....NOW! PS. and there won't be a recovery in the USA till the good paying jobs return.
@Trapster99 Yes it is. US create money out of nowhere and hand it to Chinese. US wages are way to high to compete with the rest. USA back in 1906 does not resemble USA today at all, think about why.
@rumco The history of jobs in the USA is high paying finished goods, of the highest quality. Ever hear of the New England Mill Town? Up until 40 years ago, the USA produced the best in the world and the economy was fantastic. Labor has been under attack for the past 50 years; since Trueman started to kill the New Deal. Hard labor has beed devalued and scorned. Now the economy is comming apart because-we no longer produce anything of value in the USA. The guy in the WH has no clue either.
@Trapster99 And why is it that USA are not competitive anymore? Could it be because of an enormous government that is sucking up all resources? Or too much regulation? Or too much borrowing? Even that stupid New Deal is nothing compared to today's bailouts and stimulus. Cut off the cancer that is government now. USA have to lower their standard of living, just like Europe. One cannot stimulate, regulate or borrow their way to prosperity.
@rumco I agree with everything you just posted. For a real DURABLE RECOVERY to happen, the high wage jobs (of the high wage type) MUST return. Government borrowing to give to the bankers, and parasitic taxes are NOT The solution. However, the government does have a roll to play in protecting workers from forign slave labor.
@Trapster99 No. Government has no role in preventing people from voluntarily interacting with each other using contracts. That's what an employment contract is. Many Americans are going to have to clean toilets and make stuff for low wages to get competitive, build up savings. You can't beat China if you artificially push up wages. I suggest reading some Austrian Economics.
@rumco Oh and like the Chicago School of Austerity? Von Hayek? The Pelleran Society?? Austerity is not gonna save America. Do you really think Cleveland is in economic trouble because people are not allowed to clean toilets at below minimum wage? Please. One thing is certain Rumco--we here in the USA are in for a Hard Rain and soon. DONE
@Trapster99 What you saying is you are entitled to a certain American standard of living at the expense of other people. What your entitlement does is restrict individuals freedom to buy what they want to buy. You are saying we have to give our money to you, simply because you deserve it as an American. That's essentially socialism. Your grandfather and everyone in American came here and made it, because of freedom/capitalism, not protectionism/socialism.
@Thorbie False. I am saying that to be viable in the United States one must have a high paying productive job. Henry Ford paid his workers a decent wage so they could afford to buy the cars they were making. My Grandfather was paid a decent wage because his cost of living was a factor of his productive ability. He also worked, hard, in a factory that produced things that others in the USA wanted and could afford to buy.
@Trapster99 Hard work is what made your grandfather successful. Did he ask for a hand out the way you are? Demanding that we all subsidize your way of life instead of choosing to buy a cheaper product which would help us out or maybe even perhaps buying a better product that's not American. Wages are artificially high, because we have a minimum wage and we have unions who push for more and more benefits bankrupting companies. GM pays almost twice as much as Toyota. Which one is doing better?
@Thorbie If a slave in China working for $2 a day or less can produce what I make cheeper.....should that slave's company be allowed to sell their products in the country I live in and pay taxes in??? Im I or my fellow workers asking for a 'hand out'?? GM? GM is a mess for a factor for reasons. Back in the 70's GM stopped making decent cars and became a car FIANCING company. I drive a Honda, made in the USA by US workers. I'm fine with that.
@Thorbie My Grandfather worked hard, became a Union member, retired at the age of 65 and lived to be 89 with SS and a pension that allowed him to live a quiet and dignified reitrement. He'd kiss each pension check he got in the mail, understandable how hard he had to work for it. Oh, and I can't get my Grandfather's job today because it NO LONGER EXISTS, nor does the FACTORY he worked at...Allied Chemical plant in Solvay outside of Syracuse NY.
@Trapster99 Here's a really simply example that might help you understand. If you can go down the street and buy the same exact hamburger at one of two stands, one charging $1 and one charging $5, which one will you buy from? What if the more expensive seller wanted to keep up his standard of living and wanted to force you to buy his burgers instead of the cheaper one. Would that make any logical sense to you, whether logically or in the interest of freedom? Please think about it.
@Thorbie There are many reasons why I'd buy a burger at $5 instead of $1. Better quality beef, better resturant and service, ect. ect...That's capitolism. However, if the $1 burger is a function of SLAVE WAGES paid in a foreign nation, then driving the US producer out of the marketplace is not capitolism, it's theft. 40% Tarriff on all goods coming into the USA till China ends its slave factories.
@Trapster99 Firs of all, nobody is entitled to a job. That is once again, socialism. You seem to hate China so much, yet you basically want to be more like China and have government enforced benefits and economic restrictions. I see you'd still rather pay more, but you changed my fact pattern. I didn't say the $5 burger was better quality I said it was the same quality. If you would pay more for the exact same thing you are acting irrationally and to your detriment. Do you pay extra tip...
@Trapster99 ...when you eat at restaurants? Maybe 30%? Some waiters get paid very little. Do you buy the most expensive products over cheaper ones? If you had the choice between two American products, one being cheaper than the other, would you really choose the more expensive one simply to ensure someone makes a larger profit off you to have a higher standard of living? Further, jobs don't exist to ensure a worker's standard of living. They exist because there is a market for a product...
@Trapster99 ...or service and someone who sees opportunity in that requires labor in order to bring that product or service to the consumer. A worker is merely trading his labor for the value of that labor. As long as you have free will you can choose not to work there. That freedom is capitalism. You are talking about socialism, where you can get exactly what you want, using force upon the employer and on the tax payer. You're a socialist period. If you want to know why pensions are...
@Trapster99 ...less common nowadays take a look at California. State workers currently get the benefits you praise (union membership, pensions for life) and the state is over $20 billion in debt and the worst employees can't get fired. If a business gave out pensions today, had to allow unionization and pay a wage above market value, I wouldn't be surprised that such a business and factory is closed to day. In fact I would expect that to be true. Consider what that is.
@sugarkang.. um, like when bush and the conservatives had office and started the only war in history where taxes were NOT raised to help pay for it.. is that a better understanding of basic economics sugarkang?
@sugarkang i was only asking about your bias. You don't know me, therefore your comment about my concept of foreign policy is a purely ignorant assumption, nor did you even attempt to use any of my other posts as evidence of your claim. This is the extent of my response to you sir/maam because there is obviously a connection in your logic about me and your logic about rich/poor/welfare concepts and that is you have no real evidence to support your claims, only personal emotions. Watch less Fox.
Cleveland wont fix any of their problems, because they are ran by big government progressives. They will just beg for a federal bailout and continue to raise taxes.
@hawkermustang Who can blame them when federal politicians have no backbone and won't stop bailing them out. Federalism has been perverted into this system of if the state succeeds good, if not then we will just chuck money at the state/local government till they get their fiscal house in order. Where are there any incentives under this system for Ohio/Cleveland politicians to have anything resembling fiscal responsibility??
i say he did leave because of money, untell someone can prove other wise like a dono a 10 second video clip of him saying y he left would have been awesome
Where does all the money go? Our Ohio taxes are so high. Some other states like New York and New Jersey are even higher. What do any of us have to show for it? Not a damn thing. Ohio is not exceptional. Our infrastructure and services aren't better. Are they? Apparently what we get is just more well paid bureaucrats. Cut the spending. Cut the spending. It's the only answer.
In studies conducted by The Economist in 2005 Cleveland was ranked as one of the most livable cities in the United States,[11] and the city was ranked as the best city for business meetings in the continental U.S.
...Huh?? Is The Economist full of morons or what? Looks like a biased Clevelander made or edited the article on wiki. And plus, isn't Miami almost in a similar situation as Cleveland??
My question is, why is Cleveland the only city Reason is focusing on right now?? Is it simply because one of their big contributors or friends is Drew Carey? I'm sure there are plenty of other failing big cities that could use some help, too.
@whoo689 Btw, what year is "The Drew Carey Show" supposed to be set in? I mean, the show itself was pretty recently on tv, but if Cleveland's been like this for a while, it can't have been set that recently. After all, all the cast members are lip-syncing some song called "Cleveland Rocks" and shouting the words several times in the song. It must've been a while since Cleveland truly rocked.
@whoo689 Well, "Reason Saves" was Drew's idea, so it makes sense that they would do Cleveland, the city he knows and cares the most about. Better to have specifics about one city than generic statements about many. And who knows, they might do others later.
How pathetic is the Governor of Miami ? Appearing in a fucking video for some idiot that can shoot hoops. America is fucked because Americans have shit priorities. Most of these morons will never even meet him.
This has been flagged as spam show
We all must learn.
felpaluche 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i like your video pretty awesome =)) keep it up
lindsaywashington57 3 months ago
Does money make people happy? Do we want money, or do we want love, health, and well-being for all?
treehuggersteve 7 months ago
If lower taxes is always the answer then why not just get rid of them?
TheSheaDizzle 1 year ago
@TheSheaDizzle good idea
El3ctricPenguin 1 year ago
@El3ctricPenguin Not at all. I was being sarcastic. Try to have roads to drive on with out taxes. lmao or schools. Or the Military that protects us. or firefighters to save us. or parks for our children to play in. Or .. anything that you see around you.
TheSheaDizzle 1 year ago
Cities like Charlotte (i've been there) and other sunbelt cities are "can do" cities with leaders whom cut pass the social bullshit and get things done and the same is working for Greenburgh and Spartansburgh South Carolina (where BMW's come from) and this is all really due to the fact Sun Belt Cities don't have the oligarchy government of a city like Cleveland or Buffalo and the folks of Detroit proper just flat out get what they deserve as they descend into the 3rd world
rileymayhem20 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
yo, ridiculous high-lights. ReasonTV I especially like the beginning =) Could you imagine that I trained enough to start dunking! I just used the the nba exercise course over at (50 inch vertical [dot] com) and did it in only 2 months!
Lessons From LeBron: What Clevelanders Should Really Be Pissed About jpsztqpmxqfp fgjfviuudzmzc #ReasonTV
Harvey67092 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm sure LeBron James was a liberal when it was convenient, but now I'm sure he understands basic economics, so you see it's not the lack of understanding it's that most liberal's dont care about basic economics.
QWERTY34990 1 year ago
This is capitalism at work, self interest is not bad. LaBron should do what is best for him, not for you. And you should do what is best for you too.
And WTF is wrong with people? The sky is falling around you and you are worried about LaBron? Seriously, fix your freaking crumbling hole or abandon it like the other half of the population has
But hey, at least you're not Detroit..
Ozmator 1 year ago
That's right! If Cleveland wants to turn around, they better get with it, LeBron is gone & he's not the savior of Cleveland. The people of Cleveland can be the saviors of Cleveland if they invest in their city and elect officials willing to work hard for them, not "themselves".
pearceplatoon 1 year ago
dont bullshit he didnt leave over damn taxes... the motherfucker is a multi millionaire hes just an unloyal bastard
onlyusemegrenade 1 year ago
@onlyusemegrenade So what exactly does that mean? He just left for the heck of it?
hoppinglark 1 year ago
@hoppinglark yeah that's exactly what im saying
onlyusemegrenade 1 year ago
@onlyusemegrenade
So let me get this straight. He did not leave for any self interest reason or anything like that, he just has no loyalty and left to spite you? Is that correct?
If the entire Cleveland economy is based on LaBron then there is a serious problem!
Ozmator 1 year ago
@Ozmator if thats what you choose to believe than sure
onlyusemegrenade 1 year ago
@onlyusemegrenade
I choose to believe a little thing commonly known as reality. Well in some cases it is a very big thing.
Ozmator 1 year ago
@Ozmator sounds good. sorry i dont even remember what this covversation is about
onlyusemegrenade 1 year ago
@Ozmator
Yeah, ReasonTV is a complete joke and propaganda tool when it comes to economics. It's nonsensical to believe that he actually left because of high taxes. Remember, Lebron is going to South Beach.
I think the reasoning is self-explanatory.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance
Its 'nonsensical' to think that someone would move to save millions of dollars of their earnings? How does that even sort of make sense? People will drive across town to save a few pennies on a loaf of bread, of course someone with millions would move to save millions. The fact that he could save money on a beach is just extra whipped cream on his freaking pie!
But whatever the case, Cleveland sucks, it is a whole that should be filled in with road debris, I would move too!
Ozmator 1 year ago
@Ozmator
Did Lebron ever say he was moving because of high taxes?
Also, Lebron is taking a pay-cut by switching teams, so he isn't going to be making that much by moving. He's moving to South Beach. Need more be said?
This is nothing but an ghoulish opportunity for Libertarians to put words into Lebron's mouth to push their agenda.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance
from the narrator 'Did LaBron leave for more money? No.'
Point is he left because Cleveland sucks, it has for half a century and has only gotten worse.
My point was that it would make sense for him to leave for lower taxes even if he took a pay cut first. I've done it in Penn. I left one job for a lower paying one because that county did not tax me so in the end I made more with a lower salary.
And Oh No! that ghoulish Libertarian agenda: Leave us alone! So scary.
Ozmator 1 year ago
Drew carrey should run for clevleand mayor
caddyshack12190 1 year ago
yes, Cleveland will always be, "The Mistake By The Lake"
LiberatingKnowledge 1 year ago
did he say "Oedipus complex" @ 1:12?????
hpso12xu 1 year ago
@hpso12xu He said "ediface" basically a large emposing building
vemeyers 1 year ago
lower taxes means more jobs and better economy. thats always been the case, the only people who like to raise taxes are greedy politicians who want to make even more money at the cost of the poor peoples jobs and well being. thats why cities like detriot and cleveland are in ruins because the people in charge raised the taxes way too much and it killed the city.
ihmen 1 year ago 6
@ihmen Politicians pay is capped, raising taxes has no fiscal benefit to politicians, in fact it's often bad for them in general because it makes them look bad politically. Also we have some of the lowest taxes in our country's history and our economy has collapsed so what you're saying doesn't make any sense.
Mestilf22 1 year ago 2
@Mestilf22
And they don't make money from kickbacks and jobs from their friends who they use your money to finance, right?
jetrpg22 1 year ago
@jetrpg22 Having higher taxes has really nothing to do with increased corruption. In fact the lower taxes are the more CEO's tend to take out for personal bonuses that are then used to lobby congress for lower taxes and deregulation. Sorry but your libertarian fiscal conservative buddies have been gypped
Mestilf22 1 year ago
@Mestilf22 this was the dumbest response i seen today
rileymayhem20 1 year ago
Watch Zeitgeist Addendum and Awakening
This will give you a more broader picture of our economic system.
As for sports, it's all a scam to get the Hard working poor to spend they're paper money or credit on junk and crap from all these organizations, so people can play the worshipping game over and over and over again.
Wake up everyone, Reality isn't what it seems. Our Entire monetary system is AN ILLUSION FOR CONTROL AND MANIPULATION
bigsteelguy 1 year ago
interesting perspective!!!
PatricksTime 1 year ago
Lower taxes = a great economy. Works every time.
FreeAgain2 1 year ago 7
@FreeAgain2 Except for the past 10 years
Mestilf22 1 year ago
All true.
High taxes are for suckers.
the82spartans 1 year ago
more Republican propaganda
Fact is all the "red" states survive on welfare dollars it receives from the "blue" states
If the Republicans are for something, that means humanity as a whole outside of the top 1% will lose out
MyPasswordIsUserName 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MyPasswordIsUserName
"If the Republicans are for something, that means humanity as a whole outside of the top 1% will lose out
MyPasswordIsUserName 1 hour ago
That statement makes no sense at all.
Thill029 1 year ago 4
@MyPasswordIsUserName take away the welfare vote and ObaMao loses in 2012
but nice try at commie history revisionism
HangProgressives 1 year ago
@HangProgressives
batshit crazy.
nwfilmschool 1 year ago
@nwfilmschool awww having trouble with reality again
HangProgressives 1 year ago
@MyPasswordIsUserName
ROFLMAO! I'll pretend to take your comment seriously long enough to respond.
Reason is not exactly what I would call 'Republican' - Tact is that you have no clue what you are talking about, Dem states are bankrupt, period. Some Repub states fare only slightly better. But those that make money move to where they are allowed to keep it, duh. People who make money provide jobs as well. You will never get a job from a poor person, at least not a real one.
Ozmator 1 year ago
My point is, us americans all have our individualistic opinions that we claim noone else (or at least our public officials) understand basic economics, all we ( the public) seem to do is complain about how everyone else is doing it wrong. when are we going to stop blaming others? You are the problem, i am the problem.. all of us sitting at home on our fat, lazy, behinds, yelling at the stupidtube and blogging about of lack of satisfaction with gov't officials..
eimajism 1 year ago 2
lol, i love capitalism... and since all of the ppl here point thier fingers at fed and liberals and whatever else, my question is .. why don't you (such as individuals like sugarkang or hawkermustang) run for office since you have the answers and noone else does, u can fix all the prolems with your all mighty knowlegde on how economies should be ran.
---------------------out of room, continued on next post--------------------------
eimajism 1 year ago 2
@eimajism
Because the rest of the politicians who are bought would push them out of the party, have you seen what the GOP and FOX did to Ron Paul when he ran?
He was the only candidate who predicted, down to every last detail, not only what would happen, (the collapse), but more importantly, how. Detail by detail. And it happened exactly how he said it would.
Ron Paul understands, and he did run for office. The problem?
RP refuses to be bought out, by anyone.
treysparker 1 year ago
Great stuff, Reason TV! I was hoping to hear something meaningful about this issue.
amaone 1 year ago
could be the high taxes...could be Dwayne Wade and Cris Bosh in Miami...
Betajacke 1 year ago
I feel like NC (as a state) could also use some of that advice-- the state is giving companies tax breaks to bring jobs in.
The entire school system is in shambles, starting with property taxes that must go to the state before anything else can be done.
And we're talking about how great the NASCAR Hall of Fame and the Meineke Car Care Bowl will help out the state's economy. Feh.
Quelkaima 1 year ago
Easily one of the dumbest videos I've seen in awhile
Mestilf22 1 year ago
@Mestilf22
Yup. Using Lebron for a political message just doesn't mix. People are pissed about Lebron not because Cavs lost their economical hero but because of other various reasons such as jumping onto the bandwagon, tantalizing his fans, the hypocrisy of Lebron's tattoo, etc. Plus, Lebron is not leaving for the same reasons as many other people who left Cleveland.
hansonslee 1 year ago
Ohio is a shit stain as are all dem run states....Take your cash and hide it Lebron ,dont let those greedy treasonous commie progressive insurgents near it
HangProgressives 1 year ago
@HangProgressives kill conservatives
MyPasswordIsUserName 1 year ago
@MyPasswordIsUserName LMAO seeing how we out number you treasonous commie progressive insurgents by 2 to 1
Come get some
HangProgressives 1 year ago
This video is 100% common sense, filled with solutions that would return the US to some form of prosperity and liberty, and it will be railed as racist, cruel, uncaring, etc., by the progressives who are addicted to big government and high taxes. Our enemies are not in afghanistant people, they are here all around every single one of us...
duanescot 1 year ago
how about this: who gives a flying shit!! people are loosing their homes, dont have enough money to feed their familys, we are currently at war in afganistan and our children are getting wounded and killed... and you worry about this asshole changing teams? this is why other country's look at the u.s.a and laugh their ass off at us. Americans are so obsessed with the latest and greatest gagets and shit like this report that we all have lost real focus.. i truly feel sorry for us in the yrs ahead
ITRIPOVERMYCOCK 1 year ago
Florida makes up for letting Lebron off the tax hook by raising various forms of consumption taxes that burden the middle class and poor. Believe it or not, Florida is still broke, but a tag and registration will cost you 500 dollars. Who is that going to negatively affect as a percentage of income?
The answer is obvious.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
Hey Cleveland, at least your not Buffalo.
juniorjer 1 year ago
I had a journalism teacher that was from cleveland and talked about how bad it was (and how the people in my class couldnt understand) but she would always bring up how LeBron was the only hope in that city
znirich 1 year ago
@znirich: A teacher who views any athlete as a kind of savior is obvious unequipped to teach. Athletes have a limited effect on society (other than playing in taxpayer provided venues). Ever hear of a business moving to a city because of
a team let alone a single athlete. Want proof? Just look to the Bronx around 170th
Street between Jerome Ave and the Concourse barely 10 blocks from Yankee Stadium-90 years of tradition-see the prosperity. What did she teach standards of modern journalism?
MusicEqualsMemories 1 year ago
@MusicEqualsMemories Oh, i know she was a Terrible terrible teacher. I'm not really sure what that class was suppose to be about maybe a bit of historical context, because we did talk a bit about past journalist and news mediums newspapers, tv, radio. It was pointless enough but then several classes she just make appeals to emotion about the healthcare legislation at the time it was still pending. She once even said that the bill was only 100 pages long and written in plain english .
znirich 1 year ago
@MusicEqualsMemories .... continued. she would babble on about non bias journalism and then make the most bias statements. I also felt that on a number of occasions she took other philosophical views out of context
znirich 1 year ago
I'm sure LeBron James was a liberal when it was convenient, but now I'm sure he understands basic economics, so you see it's not the lack of understanding it's that most liberal's dont care about basic economics.
QWERTY34990 1 year ago
Concise and precise. A great video. Those that live in Cleveland should try to be their own hero…and fix that crumbling city.
bynumjimmy 1 year ago 10
Smartest 1:51 I have seen in a long time.
Trapster99 1 year ago
Did Nick Gillespie record this in a toilet stall?
AnotherUserNamedPaul 1 year ago
California is going through the same shit. Fucking liberals do not understand basic economics.
sugarkang 1 year ago 18
@sugarkang It's not liberals, it greed and silly thiniking that weakness and bad behavior should be rewarded. Back in 1970 ALL of the USA was running sky high. We had just gone to the Moon and our industry was second to none.
Want to improve the economy? The high paying industrial jobs have to return. Let's say NO to allowing low wage imports into our country and bankrupting all of us. There is no way any of us could compete with a $2 a day wage slave in China.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 "The high paying industrial jobs have to return." Oh hell, why don't we just pay high prices for everything then. Raise the minimum wage to $50 so that everyone in McDonald's gets paid more than teachers. The problem IS liberals like you that think if rich people would just pay for poor people, everything would be alright. You need to understand basic economics. I'd start with Thomas Sowell.
sugarkang 1 year ago 2
@sugarkang
Maybe you should research disposable income before asserting that someone else needs to learn basic economics. The minimum wage exists for reasons other than ethics.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance I suggest Milton Friedman on minimum wages. YouTube it. Educate yourself. The minimum wage exists at the DETRIMENT to poor communities. This is at at economic level AS WELL AS an ethical level. Economics is your friend. GET ACQUAINTED HIPPY.
sugarkang 1 year ago 3
@sugarkang
I've heard Milton Friedman's incoherent rants about the minimum wage being racist. The problem is that the economic data doesn't back up what he asserts.
Calling people hippies isn't much of an economic argument, nor is your argument from authority fallacy.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance "the economic data doesn't back up what he asserts." Uh, he was a world renowned, nobel prize winning ECONOMIST. You are a fucking joke. LEARN SHIT BEFORE YOU SPEAK
sugarkang 1 year ago
@sugarkang
This is another argument from authority.
Paul Krugman also won a Nobel Prize. Do you take everything he says for granted?
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Well the minimum wage certain doesn't exist for ethics, since restricting the right of contract sounds highly unethical to me.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
Exploitation of a labor surplus isn't ethical either. But as you stated, it isn't mainly because of ethics, but rather economics. However, I get the feeling that you don't see it that way.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance You can't exploit someone when there's a consensual agreement. Wages are determined by the free market. Not all jobs are worth minimum wage, but if they are worth more, employers don't need to be told to pay for them. We don't need wage floors for doctors, lawyers, ceos or scientists. The reasoning behind minimum wage would lead us to suggest that we should, or else they would be "exploited." ....
Thorbie 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...If I offer a job for 1 penny an hour, nobody will take it. To get someone to take the job, I'll have to raise the wage until at least one person wants to take the job over nothing, or over any other job he could get. Further, I may not want the first person willing to do the job. So I may raise the wage even more to get someone with the requisite skills to do the job. If he can get a better deal elsewhere he will take that other offer, and he should....
Thorbie 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...Now if you had in place a minimum wage, then every single job that has a market wage below that wage floor will now be out of a job or getting paid more than what their labor is worth in the marketplace. Some companies will pay them more, because they need the job done. Others will fire employees and delegate the work to other employees. This is why it is unethical and illogical. It prevents two consenting parties from making a contract that benefits both of them.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
People will take low pay because they have to eat. There is a labor surplus, which drives wages down. However, companies already employ all the people they need to, so job creation will not be a result of minimum wage removal due to diminishing utility of labor. Instead, people will just receive lower pay, which will result in less spending, which will lead to macroeconomic deflation and job loss.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Like I said before, "need" isn't independent of one's self interest. If someone needs to eat, they still won't waste hours of their day and labor working for a penny an hour if there are better ways to make a living. The whole idea behind a market wage is that the supply meets demand. There is never such a thing as a labor surplus. In a free market, there should be virtually zero unemployment. Further a company will never stop hiring because they have all they need...
Thorbie 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...A company would rather expand as much as it can to maximize profit. If they have he money to do so, they will always try to expand their business and if they're able to, they will hire more people. If you restrict the free market with wage controls you're going to have less employment, because it's more expensive to employ certain workers. While everyone having more money will obviously drive the economy, restricting the market in this way just hurts it. What you...
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
Also, when the poor have a higher income, unlike the rich that save a large portion of their income, they're going to spend the money on goods and services, so businesses will ramp up production to meet demand, which results in job creation. You're only looking at immediate microeconomic outcomes, rather than the long term macroeconomic outcome.
The economic data backs this up.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance ...get instead is more poor people and more unemployed people. Money doesn't come out of thin air either. If you are paying low skill employees more to do the same job they would do for less, you're taking money from some other part of the business, which makes it harder for them to expand and hire more people. Paying people to put the money back in the business does not create growth. You're just moving wealth around, as opposed to creating it.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
You're leaving out disposable income within an economy. Also, supply won't meet demand, and there will always be a labor surplus unless every business is an economy of scale. However, that isn't the case.
The consensus of data has shown that a minimum wage actually lowers unemployment. This is because resources are allocated to people who spend their money rather than save it. Without the rise in demand, businesses won't employ more people due to diminishing marginal utility.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Where is the "Consensus" of data that demonstrates minimum wages lower unemployment? Not to mention what gives the State the right to dictate what a private company does with it's payroll? That is a matter between the employer and employee.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d
A quick Google search will bring up numerous sources that back up what I say.
The State is a tool of the people. If the people wish to have higher wages because the Free Market isn't accomplishing that goal, then that is what should happen. Market wages aren't socially acceptable, nor economically acceptable in the long run, so it makes sense to implement a wage floor.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Well I have googled a number of resources that say the opposite. Considering that a nation like france has a high minimum wage and regularly high unemployment, it would seem the theory is flawed if not fallacious.
The ideal state is a tool of the people, but most states are too corrupt, bloated and inefficient to dynamically meet the market demands for labor and goods. Market wages are not 'socially acceptable'? Says whom?
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d
I actually conceded that the minimum wage reduces unemployment. I was mistaking this subject for another that I had researched earlier on. When I looked through a few sources, I found the effects of minimum wage were mostly neutral on employment levels.
New Zealand has a higher minimum wage than France I believe, yet relatively low unemployment. Canada also has less unemployment than the US, yet has a substantially higher minimum wage, indicating minimal effects on employment.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Loans give people access to resources faster than they normally would be able. If the loan taker repays on time, it is a win/win. The Lender makes money, the taker gets a home (or something), the bank saver gets interest. When we see the government, as it has, guaranteeing high risk loans not only does it artificially drive up the cost of homes, we get the crisis that we now have because those loans were bad because the banks didn't assume any risk.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d
My point was that there isn't a permanent rise in demand from loans. A person who takes a loan out may be able to buy something he/she normally wouldn't, but once repayment on the loan begins, that person will have less disposable income, which will lead to less spending. I'm not arguing against lending, I'm just saying a permanent rise in demand would have to come from a permanent rise in income.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@Thorbie
Now remember, the minimum wage causes a rise in demand because the poor have a more disposable income, which they will spend. By removing the wage floor, the rich will only pocket the money - not spend it - because they have already spent all the are inclined to. That excess of money gets saved, thus there is no rise in demand, so business owners will not increase production.
Why would they even do so without a necessary rise in demand? How do you account for this?
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance That assumption makes no sense. Even if the rich employer is hurt less by paying a higher wage for their employees they will definitely feel it and it's ridiculous to say they won't. If your presumption were true, we wouldn't need a minimum wage, because an employer would not be rational enough to want to pay a market wage and instead would be willing to pay much more since it's no skin of their nose. What actually happens is that a rise in wage does affect an employer.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
Well, if one employer does it, while others don't, he/she will be at a significant disadvantage. Micro-economically, a wage floor is not beneficial, but macro-economically, it certainly is. This is why if all businesses have to abide by a wage floor due to government sanction, it is very beneficial to the overall economy.
Look up the patterns of unemployment correlating with a rise in minimum wage.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Look despite already knowing that there is a strong correlation between higher minimum wage and unemployment I decided to make good on your request and I am not surprised in the slightest. Almost ever single link that pops up is arguing that minimum wage creates higher unemployment. Now given that's not the basis for my conclusion, I'm just merely pointing that out since that is where your proof supposedly is. Furthermore, your theory still doesn't make any sense.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
You're actually mostly right about the minimum wage. I must have mistaken it for something else I had done previous research on. However, I did find that the negative effects were minimal, and the most adverse results weren't directly related to overall unemployment. Employment levels show to have been minimally affected by changes in minimum wage either way they went.
The CPI has also shown to be affected very little by increases in the minimum wage.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance I guarantee you that if you add a $1,000 cost to a business you will see that $1000 cost spread to the consumer. Low skill workers may have higher wages (the ones that still have jobs), but the cost to the businesses should virtually wipe out any intended spending on the part of the minimum wage workers. You seem to think a business will sit back and accept higher costs if they can avoid it. They won't and they don't.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Do you think that Rich people hoard their gold in giant vaults? Any money that is not spent or taxed by the rich, like anyone else, goes into banks where it is loaned out. Unless of course the taxes are so high that the person is inclined to store their money offshore.
A rich man may save money by paying less, but a person is free to take that job or not. Minimum wages ensure that the least skilled workers have the most difficultly getting work.
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d
Those savings may be loaned out, but it eventually has to be paid back. In the end, that money isn't being spent at businesses, but instead sitting in a bank account.
People aren't all too free to not work, for they will not be able to comfortably live unemployed for long.
Also, the minimum wage helps the lesser-skilled to find work because unemployment goes down with the introduction of a minimum wage.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance Of course loaned money is spent at businesses, what else do people borrow money for? The bank takes a chunk of the interest paid and pays out interest to the money saver. The only hitch is, again, high taxes, which gives the incentive to the saver to keep money offshore or 'hidden'. As for minimum wage "helping" the poor, watch watch?v=7DS0XXFdyfI
kev3d 1 year ago
@kev3d
The point is that for the few months that loan is out, there is more spending at businesses; however, the next few months when the loan is being paid back, there is less money being spent at businesses, which leaves that person's overall consumption at about the same in the end.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance What do you propose as the alternative? People still spend when they are paying back a loan, lest they would starve. If people were paid triple the minimum wage, even 10X they would still need to save for a home, a boat, whatever. So during that period of saving, how would that not be the same as the period as paying back a loan, only instead of saving for 20 years and eventually getting into a home, you get into a home now and pay it off over 20 years.
kev3d 1 year ago
@TheAtheistAllegiance When you have higher minimum wage, you have higher unemployment. Whatever benefit a few extra dollars per hour to a worker does for the economy is adversely affected by those now out of a job. If your theory is correct, then communism would have brought unprecedented prosperity. What a wage floor does is take capital away for another productive use. We can simply look at the Great Depression and see that the wage controls did more to hurt than to help.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie
A wage floor only helps to produce capital because it sparks a rise in demand. This encourages investment to expand activities to meet the rise in demand, which requires more workers and additional capital - not less.
It's a matter of shifting money from savings accounts into the hands of those who spend it at businesses, which benefits the economy in obvious ways.
TheAtheistAllegiance 1 year ago
@sugarkang See, something is wrong with the way we talk to each other in America these days. Did I say a thing about paying McDonald's workers 50 bucks an hour? No. I said the high paying industrial jobs MUST return. We have to start building the high quality finished goods that other people want to buy....we did that 40 years ago.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@sugarkang Another vote for Sowell right here.
highonhayek 1 year ago
@sugarkang it is not a matter of rich paying for poor, it is a matter of everyone supporting their gov't (you seem to be fixed on the rich paying for the poor and missing the whole picture- and by your comments you seem a bit hostile about it). I would not be supprised if you were not even close to being wealthy, just hooked blindly to your values of capitalism and the american dream, and blame the fact that you have not accomplished it because a portion of your taxes goes to supporting welfare
eimajism 1 year ago
@eimajism poor people are poor because they have no concept of money management. 60% of NBA retirees go broke within 5 years. Same with Lotto winners. It doesn't matter how much welfare we give poor people. They will squander all of it. I would support welfare if it actually helped poor people lift themselves out of poverty. Unfortunately, handouts don't help people. Teaching them responsibility does.
sugarkang 1 year ago
@Trapster99 So you want protectionism. That hasn't hurt this nation before has it? Oh wait...I think they tried that right before the Great Depression with the Smoot Hawley Tariff. If you want to improve the economy remove economic restrictions.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie I want the US workers to be protected from the Slave Workers of China. Period. Right now the get rich quich scheme is to produce something, anything, in China for a fraction of what it costs to produce it in the USA. Then send those goods to the USA, the difference in production costs vs. sale price = Huge profit. It works for a time but bankrupts the country in the process. Look at what Japan did post WWII, they kept US products out and exported to the USA and boosted economy
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 What you are talking about is protectionism. Corporations manufacture products outside the nation, because our labor costs are artificially high. Wage controls, and union benefits make it more expensive to hirer US workers. Free trade lifts workers in poor countries out of poverty and also benefits American consumers w/ cheaper products. Everyone wins, but those who somehow feel entitled to higher pay for the same work. Unions bankrupted GM, why let them bankrupt the rest of the US?
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie Yes, I am for the protection of the American Worker and American standard of living. My Grandfather came to this country alone, with a few coins in his pocket in 1906. He went to work in a factory, worked damed hard and bought a house, car, raised 4 children and sent two of them to college. Labor costs in the US 'artificially high'? Prove that. Ya think because someone in China will do the job for $2 a day means US pay is artificial?
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 Some of the stuff for sale at Wallmart is produced in factories run by the Red Army of Communist China....using, yes, Slave Prison Labor. Ya know, folks put in those jails because they had the audacity to believe in something called GOD; and other such 'crimes'. You still think Free Trade is FAIR TRADE? Think again, Free Trade is SLAVE TRADE. 40% Tarriff on all goods coming out of China.....NOW! PS. and there won't be a recovery in the USA till the good paying jobs return.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 You got it all wrong. You obviously do not understand economics nor what liberty is.
rumco 1 year ago
@rumco Oh please
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 Yes it is. US create money out of nowhere and hand it to Chinese. US wages are way to high to compete with the rest. USA back in 1906 does not resemble USA today at all, think about why.
rumco 1 year ago
@rumco The history of jobs in the USA is high paying finished goods, of the highest quality. Ever hear of the New England Mill Town? Up until 40 years ago, the USA produced the best in the world and the economy was fantastic. Labor has been under attack for the past 50 years; since Trueman started to kill the New Deal. Hard labor has beed devalued and scorned. Now the economy is comming apart because-we no longer produce anything of value in the USA. The guy in the WH has no clue either.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 And why is it that USA are not competitive anymore? Could it be because of an enormous government that is sucking up all resources? Or too much regulation? Or too much borrowing? Even that stupid New Deal is nothing compared to today's bailouts and stimulus. Cut off the cancer that is government now. USA have to lower their standard of living, just like Europe. One cannot stimulate, regulate or borrow their way to prosperity.
rumco 1 year ago
@rumco I agree with everything you just posted. For a real DURABLE RECOVERY to happen, the high wage jobs (of the high wage type) MUST return. Government borrowing to give to the bankers, and parasitic taxes are NOT The solution. However, the government does have a roll to play in protecting workers from forign slave labor.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 No. Government has no role in preventing people from voluntarily interacting with each other using contracts. That's what an employment contract is. Many Americans are going to have to clean toilets and make stuff for low wages to get competitive, build up savings. You can't beat China if you artificially push up wages. I suggest reading some Austrian Economics.
rumco 1 year ago
@rumco Oh and like the Chicago School of Austerity? Von Hayek? The Pelleran Society?? Austerity is not gonna save America. Do you really think Cleveland is in economic trouble because people are not allowed to clean toilets at below minimum wage? Please. One thing is certain Rumco--we here in the USA are in for a Hard Rain and soon. DONE
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 What you saying is you are entitled to a certain American standard of living at the expense of other people. What your entitlement does is restrict individuals freedom to buy what they want to buy. You are saying we have to give our money to you, simply because you deserve it as an American. That's essentially socialism. Your grandfather and everyone in American came here and made it, because of freedom/capitalism, not protectionism/socialism.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie False. I am saying that to be viable in the United States one must have a high paying productive job. Henry Ford paid his workers a decent wage so they could afford to buy the cars they were making. My Grandfather was paid a decent wage because his cost of living was a factor of his productive ability. He also worked, hard, in a factory that produced things that others in the USA wanted and could afford to buy.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 Hard work is what made your grandfather successful. Did he ask for a hand out the way you are? Demanding that we all subsidize your way of life instead of choosing to buy a cheaper product which would help us out or maybe even perhaps buying a better product that's not American. Wages are artificially high, because we have a minimum wage and we have unions who push for more and more benefits bankrupting companies. GM pays almost twice as much as Toyota. Which one is doing better?
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie If a slave in China working for $2 a day or less can produce what I make cheeper.....should that slave's company be allowed to sell their products in the country I live in and pay taxes in??? Im I or my fellow workers asking for a 'hand out'?? GM? GM is a mess for a factor for reasons. Back in the 70's GM stopped making decent cars and became a car FIANCING company. I drive a Honda, made in the USA by US workers. I'm fine with that.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Thorbie My Grandfather worked hard, became a Union member, retired at the age of 65 and lived to be 89 with SS and a pension that allowed him to live a quiet and dignified reitrement. He'd kiss each pension check he got in the mail, understandable how hard he had to work for it. Oh, and I can't get my Grandfather's job today because it NO LONGER EXISTS, nor does the FACTORY he worked at...Allied Chemical plant in Solvay outside of Syracuse NY.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 Here's a really simply example that might help you understand. If you can go down the street and buy the same exact hamburger at one of two stands, one charging $1 and one charging $5, which one will you buy from? What if the more expensive seller wanted to keep up his standard of living and wanted to force you to buy his burgers instead of the cheaper one. Would that make any logical sense to you, whether logically or in the interest of freedom? Please think about it.
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Thorbie There are many reasons why I'd buy a burger at $5 instead of $1. Better quality beef, better resturant and service, ect. ect...That's capitolism. However, if the $1 burger is a function of SLAVE WAGES paid in a foreign nation, then driving the US producer out of the marketplace is not capitolism, it's theft. 40% Tarriff on all goods coming into the USA till China ends its slave factories.
Trapster99 1 year ago
@Trapster99 Firs of all, nobody is entitled to a job. That is once again, socialism. You seem to hate China so much, yet you basically want to be more like China and have government enforced benefits and economic restrictions. I see you'd still rather pay more, but you changed my fact pattern. I didn't say the $5 burger was better quality I said it was the same quality. If you would pay more for the exact same thing you are acting irrationally and to your detriment. Do you pay extra tip...
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Trapster99 ...when you eat at restaurants? Maybe 30%? Some waiters get paid very little. Do you buy the most expensive products over cheaper ones? If you had the choice between two American products, one being cheaper than the other, would you really choose the more expensive one simply to ensure someone makes a larger profit off you to have a higher standard of living? Further, jobs don't exist to ensure a worker's standard of living. They exist because there is a market for a product...
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Trapster99 ...or service and someone who sees opportunity in that requires labor in order to bring that product or service to the consumer. A worker is merely trading his labor for the value of that labor. As long as you have free will you can choose not to work there. That freedom is capitalism. You are talking about socialism, where you can get exactly what you want, using force upon the employer and on the tax payer. You're a socialist period. If you want to know why pensions are...
Thorbie 1 year ago
@Trapster99 ...less common nowadays take a look at California. State workers currently get the benefits you praise (union membership, pensions for life) and the state is over $20 billion in debt and the worst employees can't get fired. If a business gave out pensions today, had to allow unionization and pay a wage above market value, I wouldn't be surprised that such a business and factory is closed to day. In fact I would expect that to be true. Consider what that is.
Thorbie 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sugarkang any idiot understands basic economics liberals dont fucking care about basic economics.
QWERTY34990 1 year ago
@sugarkang.. um, like when bush and the conservatives had office and started the only war in history where taxes were NOT raised to help pay for it.. is that a better understanding of basic economics sugarkang?
eimajism 1 year ago
@eimajism don't digress about the war. Stick to the subject. You have no concept of foreign policy so I don't even want to start with you.
sugarkang 1 year ago
@sugarkang i was only asking about your bias. You don't know me, therefore your comment about my concept of foreign policy is a purely ignorant assumption, nor did you even attempt to use any of my other posts as evidence of your claim. This is the extent of my response to you sir/maam because there is obviously a connection in your logic about me and your logic about rich/poor/welfare concepts and that is you have no real evidence to support your claims, only personal emotions. Watch less Fox.
eimajism 1 year ago
@sugarkang you don't know the half of it friend, check this out.
online(.)wsj(.)com/article/SB10001424052748703561604575282190930932412.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
Anyone who thinks modern-day leftists know anything about economics needs to have their head examined.
bigboss686 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Let them rot in their own bureaucratic filth, it will teach other states & city councils to be more fiscally responsible.
imre1000 1 year ago 2
Comment removed
imre1000 1 year ago
Cleveland wont fix any of their problems, because they are ran by big government progressives. They will just beg for a federal bailout and continue to raise taxes.
hawkermustang 1 year ago 4
@hawkermustang Who can blame them when federal politicians have no backbone and won't stop bailing them out. Federalism has been perverted into this system of if the state succeeds good, if not then we will just chuck money at the state/local government till they get their fiscal house in order. Where are there any incentives under this system for Ohio/Cleveland politicians to have anything resembling fiscal responsibility??
Ir3zi 1 year ago
i say he did leave because of money, untell someone can prove other wise like a dono a 10 second video clip of him saying y he left would have been awesome
kainniak1 1 year ago
He should have gone to Chicago.
Wormtail81 1 year ago
Which will hit the dumpster first: Cleveland or Detroit?
Rush called it right: taxes are on EVERYONE's mind (everyone who has a job, some savings, some property).
BTW folks, go back are re-view the movie: Popeye. What was the background theme? (Hint: TAXES ON EVERYTHING!)
adamitshelanu 1 year ago
Where does all the money go? Our Ohio taxes are so high. Some other states like New York and New Jersey are even higher. What do any of us have to show for it? Not a damn thing. Ohio is not exceptional. Our infrastructure and services aren't better. Are they? Apparently what we get is just more well paid bureaucrats. Cut the spending. Cut the spending. It's the only answer.
averagejoe040 1 year ago
In studies conducted by The Economist in 2005 Cleveland was ranked as one of the most livable cities in the United States,[11] and the city was ranked as the best city for business meetings in the continental U.S.
...Huh?? Is The Economist full of morons or what? Looks like a biased Clevelander made or edited the article on wiki. And plus, isn't Miami almost in a similar situation as Cleveland??
whoo689 1 year ago
@whoo689 one of the best for business MEETINGS? doing business and business meetings are two different things my friend.
navyboym 1 year ago
He didn't leave because of taxes, he left because he wants to win
xAirJordan23x 1 year ago
Lebron joining Miami was based on good conservative values. Why does he support Obama?
XDanny181 1 year ago
My question is, why is Cleveland the only city Reason is focusing on right now?? Is it simply because one of their big contributors or friends is Drew Carey? I'm sure there are plenty of other failing big cities that could use some help, too.
whoo689 1 year ago
@whoo689 Btw, what year is "The Drew Carey Show" supposed to be set in? I mean, the show itself was pretty recently on tv, but if Cleveland's been like this for a while, it can't have been set that recently. After all, all the cast members are lip-syncing some song called "Cleveland Rocks" and shouting the words several times in the song. It must've been a while since Cleveland truly rocked.
whoo689 1 year ago
@whoo689 Well, "Reason Saves" was Drew's idea, so it makes sense that they would do Cleveland, the city he knows and cares the most about. Better to have specifics about one city than generic statements about many. And who knows, they might do others later.
vinoberg 1 year ago 2
Any excuse to bash high taxes on those poor beleguered super rich people. You douchebags never change.
Now, Miami looks like a fun city, more than Cleveland. Also rather clear LeBron James was leaving for another team regardless.
Hell, if LeBron James went to a California team with even higher taxes, would you argue that Ohio needs to raise it's taxes?
robertmike57 1 year ago
@robertmike57 Letting people keep what they earn makes us douchebags? Fuck off!
MagnusIan 1 year ago 2
@robertmike57: High taxes would be gerat if they were justified. Anyone who's spent more than five minutes in Cleveland can see that they are not.
InfernalApocalypse 1 year ago
Yay, Reason!
Free Minds and Free Markets!
freesk8 1 year ago 2
I'm probably one of the few people from Cleveland who is about to move back there--but I promise you it's only temporary.
ObjectivistAesthetic 1 year ago
good move James...taxes suck
freebob3 1 year ago
lol he leaves due to taxes... awesome.
Reckless3057 1 year ago
LJ flips off Cleveland - the mistake on the lake!
umajunkcollector 1 year ago
Even a liberal mother fucker like Lebron, knows what incentive lower taxes bring. Maybe he should let his boy Obama in on that.
Ruinous 1 year ago
Again and again, Reason nails it economically. Meanwhile, Clevelanders will waste their time lamenting another lost sports talent.
GOPsithlord 1 year ago 2
How pathetic is the Governor of Miami ? Appearing in a fucking video for some idiot that can shoot hoops. America is fucked because Americans have shit priorities. Most of these morons will never even meet him.
ryno99 1 year ago