Occupy Wall Street

Message boards : Politics : Occupy Wall Street
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 28125
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1183539 - Posted: 7 Jan 2012, 18:32:44 UTC - in response to Message 1183514.  

That's why a burger combo meal once cost $4.00 now costs $6.00 or more. When they have to pay more we pay more. That bei

Didn't you mean, when they have to pay more we pay even more?

ID: 1183539 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 28125
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1183541 - Posted: 7 Jan 2012, 18:36:49 UTC - in response to Message 1183463.  

Gary Charpentier,

Freedom today means the lamb buying the two wolves guns and expecting the wolves to protect the lamb against harmful predators.

I thought that was democracy today ... Freedom is a one way ticket leaving the USSA.


ID: 1183541 · Report as offensive
Terror Australis
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1817
Credit: 262,693,308
RAC: 44
Australia
Message 1183683 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 5:35:18 UTC - in response to Message 1183514.  

I happen to agree with this point. When the lowest wages are systematically raised , I lose out. How? you might ask. If I look at your earned wages as a percentage of the minimum wage you can see that every time the Gov't bumps it up We working folk lose more of our middle class lifestyle. Lets say you made $15.00/hour when they raised the minimum wage. You'll note that you didn't get a $2.00 raise automatically first off. Second you'll see that after 2006 you were losing ground as the minimum wage was progressively increased. so if you were making $15.00/hour in 2006 your income was approximately 2.85X the minimum wage. Assuming you were an average worker for the next 3 years and earned a 3% annual raise you'd be making $16.39/hr in 2009 when the last minimum wage increase occurred. Now the minimum wage is $7.25/hr Your wages are now 2.26X the minimum wage. Without doing anything except being an average worker your economic status to a major hit. You are, in fact, poorer than you were 3 years before. Of course this doesn't matter to people making well over the minimum as the Corporate bonuses still keep them in very nice neighborhoods.

Corporations and businesses could care less if the minimum wage gets raised. They'll just pass the cost onto the consumer in mild increments and tack on a few penny's to increase their profit. They never lose. That's why a burger combo meal once cost $4.00 now costs $6.00 or more. When they have to pay more we pay more.

The difference is, that in Oz, the percentage increase in the minimum wage is taken as a benchmark for increase in other awards, industry agreements and so on. So an increase in the minimum wage "trickles up". Therefore, a person on more than the minimum wage actually finishes up slightly better off.

You and Guy are both overlooking the fact that, due to the other factors I mentioned (currency exchange rates, interest rates, cost of raw materials etc.), prices still rise even if all wages are fixed. As I said before...

1) Inflation (ideally between 2% and 3%) is necessary to keep the the current version of capitalism "working".

2) Wages are only one input to the overall inflation rate.

From what I read, all wages in the US have been essentially flat for the last 10 years, yet this has not stopped inflation in the US economy or price rises in general. This is the reason why small businesses in the US are finding it tough, as general wages have been stagnant, the market for their goods/services has been decreasing because people can no longer afford them. This, plus their rising wholesale costs means they cannot afford to give their own employees an increase which further feeds the downward spiral.

This is the true recursive function that Guy mentioned and an excellent example of the "trickle down" effect

For a person to blame increases in the minimum wage for their woes is simplistic and ignores all the other factors.

T.A.


ID: 1183683 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 1183685 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 5:42:22 UTC - in response to Message 1183683.  

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 1183685 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1183690 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 6:29:59 UTC - in response to Message 1183685.  

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.


Skilldude,

There is a simple reason why your can of Pringles doubled in price in 3 years. 1 word: Ethanol.

As ethanol from corn production is ramped up, the price of corn goes up due to increased demand (about a 300% price increase over the last 10 years -- by comparison, the all goods CPI has gone up only about 27.5% over the same period). This increased price on corn causes farmers to re-purpose land from producing other agricultural goods (such as potatoes) to corn to 'cash in', so to speak. This causes relative shortages in the other goods, causing upward pressure on their prices.

Short version: BAD Government policy causes higher food prices.

Now then, undoubtedly there is some measure of price hikes on Pringles not due to this. Pringles, after all, is a major brand name of Proctor and Gamble. Lots of brand recognition and loyalty. Without a doubt, P&G raised some prices on their more successful stuff to help fund their... lesser successful product lines (what is a nice way to say sucky, unpopular stuff?).

But you can't put it down to 100% 'corporate greed'. Business doesn't work that way.





https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.
ID: 1183690 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 28125
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1183692 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 6:33:52 UTC - in response to Message 1183685.  
Last modified: 8 Jan 2012, 6:35:33 UTC

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.

Someone hired inspectors who actually showed up at the plant and inspected, forcing the plant owners to actually clean the equipment.

You didn't switch to the no name label? Keeping up with the Jones' is expensive.

Everyone wants maximum profit, just like you do out of your paycheck. So they raise prices and sell a few cans less, but make more. They keep raising prices until the few cans less they sell becomes a lot less cans and it costs them money. Then they know the price point for their product.

You do know about shelf fees? Where the market can make money by auctioning off a foot of shelf space, even if not a single item on that shelf sells.
ID: 1183692 · Report as offensive
BarryAZ

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 16,982,517
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1183696 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 6:56:15 UTC - in response to Message 1183685.  

Who would want Pringles in the first place! <smile>

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years.

ID: 1183696 · Report as offensive
Terror Australis
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 14 Feb 04
Posts: 1817
Credit: 262,693,308
RAC: 44
Australia
Message 1183697 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 7:01:18 UTC - in response to Message 1183685.  

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.

But I thought the "Free Market" was supposed to prevent such bilking [/sarcasm]

T.A.
ID: 1183697 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 28125
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1183810 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 17:16:36 UTC - in response to Message 1183697.  

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.

But I thought the "Free Market" was supposed to prevent such bilking [/sarcasm]

T.A.

Bilking? No. They just dumped their addictive substance on the market below the price point for a while. Now that they have the poor sots hooked they are just moving to a maximum profits price point. Think sin taxes and no matter how much they go up the government gets more revenue.

ID: 1183810 · Report as offensive
BarryAZ

Send message
Joined: 1 Apr 01
Posts: 2580
Credit: 16,982,517
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1183841 - Posted: 8 Jan 2012, 19:06:44 UTC

I believe part of the OWS movement reflects the concern that rather than move from a free market to a socialist state (the complaint of the libertarians and a sector of the Tea Party partisans) and rather than moving from a poorly government regulated state to a free market state (the complaint of the left), we are in fact moving from a surprisingly limited (and poorly at that) government regulated state to a corporate state at which point neither the government (theoretically of the people/by the people) nor individual consumers (free market) have much control -- it is all under the control of corporations -- and in particular, the select few who run the corporations -- world wide.
ID: 1183841 · Report as offensive
Profile Davissimo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Jul 08
Posts: 27
Credit: 1,827,489
RAC: 9
United States
Message 1184737 - Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 11:36:10 UTC

The Hitler/Stalin counter-strike against the OWS did not occur. This would have made martyrs of them and put them in our history books. Our police are far smarter than that. The OWS should have created a grass roots political movement to get people elected to office who support their ideals. I am embarrased that they did not. It is clear that criminals have gotten away with the highest crimes you can imagine. We need to remember the suffering caused to poor and working Americans is an open wound that continues to fester. George Bush the Elder saw to it that the criminals of the Savings & Loan scam went to prison and the economy was salvaged by higher taxes to pay for it even though it meant political suicide. I now respect the man.
All computers idle at the same speed.
ID: 1184737 · Report as offensive
Profile SUPER NATIONALIST&SUPER PRIVILEGED I'm **in' RACIST; I'm **in' BIGOTED; I'm **in' PREJUDICED; I'm **in' JUDGEMENTAL; I **In' Have ALL dA CONSCIOUS & UNCONSCIOUS BIAS & ALL Other NASTIEs a HuWoMan Can **in' Have. ALL AGENDAs ALL dA **in' Kind of Gender
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 5083
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
Russia
Message 1186104 - Posted: 18 Jan 2012, 6:17:23 UTC

Did they Occupy The Capital yesterday? I didn't notice. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

If The 99% don't like The 1%, then Revolt.

Although, In Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, etc., The Rich are Still Rich and Still living La Vida Loca.

So Revolt USAers. REVOLT HARD. REVOLT LONG.

See what It Gets Ya.

LOL all The Way To The Bank. Close all The Banks Down. The $$$ is Still There. Floating in ElectronWorld.

Revolting(As in BLECH)Dullnando

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!
ID: 1186104 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 1186801 - Posted: 20 Jan 2012, 14:47:54 UTC - in response to Message 1183690.  

Inflation can't explain how a $1.00 can of Pringles now cost closer to $2.00 in just over 3 years. At 3% we don't see that and even with the increase in Diesel prices we still wouldn't get that increase. This is a conscious choice to bilk the general populous and not blame it on their own greed. Minimum wages, inflation(its been flat ask your senior citizens about their recent cost of living raises in Social Security)or fuel. They(business) has taken advantage of the general populous and its eagerness purchase and decided to charge more because they can.


Skilldude,

There is a simple reason why your can of Pringles doubled in price in 3 years. 1 word: Ethanol.

As ethanol from corn production is ramped up, the price of corn goes up due to increased demand (about a 300% price increase over the last 10 years -- by comparison, the all goods CPI has gone up only about 27.5% over the same period). This increased price on corn causes farmers to re-purpose land from producing other agricultural goods (such as potatoes) to corn to 'cash in', so to speak. This causes relative shortages in the other goods, causing upward pressure on their prices.

Short version: BAD Government policy causes higher food prices.

Now then, undoubtedly there is some measure of price hikes on Pringles not due to this. Pringles, after all, is a major brand name of Proctor and Gamble. Lots of brand recognition and loyalty. Without a doubt, P&G raised some prices on their more successful stuff to help fund their... lesser successful product lines (what is a nice way to say sucky, unpopular stuff?).

But you can't put it down to 100% 'corporate greed'. Business doesn't work that way.





I'm not entirely sure how corn ethanol gets into "Potato" chips or Diesel fuel. Diesel can use Ethanol because it burns to easily. It would cause massive preignition.
Business doesn't run that way. Big Business certainly does. They are to big to fail. They own every facet of common foods we purchase in stores. We don't have much alternative so they are guaranteed to succeed. Basically, when 2-5 companies own all the major food processing plants in a country you can see how collusion and greed can easily manipulate prices.
Prime example... Orange Juice. Oh NOOOO the Orange crop was ruined. News from corporate headquarters state there'll be shortages. What we don't hear is that, in lieu of dumping excess crops from years past, corporations stockpiled the OJ for times that are lean. Now that times are lean they still have ample supplies and can talk about shortages all the while raising prices. Prices that will stay higher by 10% or more after the so called shortage has ended.

This really isn't that difficult to follow if you pay attention more than week to week as you head to the grocers.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 1186801 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 11777
Credit: 8,569,109
RAC: 79
United States
Message 1186897 - Posted: 20 Jan 2012, 22:22:09 UTC - in response to Message 1186801.  

I'm not entirely sure how corn ethanol gets into "Potato" chips or Diesel fuel. Diesel can use Ethanol because it burns to easily. It would cause massive preignition.
Business doesn't run that way. Big Business certainly does. They are to big to fail. They own every facet of common foods we purchase in stores. We don't have much alternative so they are guaranteed to succeed. Basically, when 2-5 companies own all the major food processing plants in a country you can see how collusion and greed can easily manipulate prices.


you and I do not own or work at a place involved in the production of potato chips. nonetheless, rather than react as you did, I did this:

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AiK_BmXMmNfzpWlUi4LHKi.bvZx4?p=ethanol+in+%22potato+chips%22&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-374

Lo and behold, more than one website mentioning there's ethanol in potato chips.
Veracity? I don't know.
But potato chips are obviously not just potatoes. Some are flavored to tatse like they have onion dip on them (when they do not), or barbeque sauce, and so o.
ID: 1186897 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 11777
Credit: 8,569,109
RAC: 79
United States
Message 1186898 - Posted: 20 Jan 2012, 22:22:29 UTC

If corporations are people, at what point does people life begin for the corporation?
ID: 1186898 · Report as offensive
Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 11777
Credit: 8,569,109
RAC: 79
United States
Message 1186899 - Posted: 20 Jan 2012, 22:23:14 UTC

If corporations are people, were the bailouts pro-life?
Or, is it more like "end of life decisions. Probably doctors' violations of DNR orders"?
ID: 1186899 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1186926 - Posted: 20 Jan 2012, 23:14:37 UTC - in response to Message 1186897.  
Last modified: 20 Jan 2012, 23:23:55 UTC

I'm not entirely sure how corn ethanol gets into "Potato" chips or Diesel fuel. Diesel can use Ethanol because it burns to easily. It would cause massive preignition.
Business doesn't run that way. Big Business certainly does. They are to big to fail. They own every facet of common foods we purchase in stores. We don't have much alternative so they are guaranteed to succeed. Basically, when 2-5 companies own all the major food processing plants in a country you can see how collusion and greed can easily manipulate prices.


you and I do not own or work at a place involved in the production of potato chips. nonetheless, rather than react as you did, I did this:

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AiK_BmXMmNfzpWlUi4LHKi.bvZx4?p=ethanol+in+%22potato+chips%22&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-374

Lo and behold, more than one website mentioning there's ethanol in potato chips.
Veracity? I don't know.
But potato chips are obviously not just potatoes. Some are flavored to tatse like they have onion dip on them (when they do not), or barbeque sauce, and so o.


Sarge,
Well, there likely is ethanol used in potato chip production, especially in the flavoring agents. Ever hear of things like vanilla extract? A lot of various flavors are a lot more soluble in ethanol than in water, so water/ethanol mix is used to extract these flavors for use in flavoring other foods...

But this is NOT what I meant, Skildude.

One more time...

The government decided to give ethanol production from corn a rather significant subsidy (for political reasons) in order to promote its use as an 'alternative' fuel. <-- The BAD policy, corn is not ideal for ethanol production, but the corn belt does have a lot of political pull.

1st wave effect:

To get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, corn farmers sell increasing amounts of the corn crop to the ethanol producers. The corn supply available for other sectors of the economy drops causing a reduction in supply, relative to demand, in those other sectors with its consequent price increases. Anything other than ethanol that is produced from corn (such as beef cattle or corn meal) has rather significant increases in upwards pressure on prices.



2nd wave effect:

To further get in on the ethanol-from-corn gravy train, farmers increase the the amount of land they use for growing corn. There is a finite amount of land suitable for growing crops (including corn), so farmers must usually shift land from some other crop to corn to do this. This causes a drop in supply of the other crops (with the resulting upwards pressure on prices for those crops (and anything else that uses those other crops in their production)). Yes, the increased supply of corn *does* relieve some of the price increases on corn from the 1st wave, but the damage (in the form of higher food prices) from the 2nd wave is much more widespread.

3rd wave:
.
.
.

nth wave:



Once all the dust settles, so to speak, the end result is that the price of dang near everything sold at the grocery store (and a lot of other goods too) goes up, sometimes by a little, sometimes by a lot, depends on the good.

But, yeah... the result of a BAD government policy (ethanol from corn subsidy) is that your can of potato chips has a price increase. Its the market that works this way. It doesn't matter if you have 2 firms, or thousands.

And, as you have noted in other posts, it tends to not go away entirely once what caused it is fixed. This tends to be more pronounced when the number of firms is small... Perhaps this part is what you meant when you mentioned 2-5 firms.

If you will note, in my post you were responding to Skildude, I mentioned P&G probably was being a tad... greedy on its Pringles line...

However, this was not the only, nor even the initial reason behind the price increase you noted.

And yes, I DO pay attention to the prices at the grocery store on an ongoing basis, as well as the news. This is what clued me into the 'ethanol effect' on food prices to start with.
ID: 1186926 · Report as offensive
Profile betreger Project Donor
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 10663
Credit: 29,581,041
RAC: 66
United States
Message 1186967 - Posted: 21 Jan 2012, 0:56:33 UTC - in response to Message 1186926.  
Last modified: 21 Jan 2012, 1:00:34 UTC

Major, a good economic analysis. In a 200 level econ class you would get a good grade for your explanation.
ID: 1186967 · Report as offensive
Profile KWSN - MajorKong
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Jan 00
Posts: 2892
Credit: 1,499,890
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1186969 - Posted: 21 Jan 2012, 1:19:08 UTC - in response to Message 1186967.  

Major, a good economic analysis. In a 200 level econ class you would get a good grade for your explanation.


Been there, done that... Same with higher than 2nd year classes too...

https://youtu.be/iY57ErBkFFE

#Texit

Don't blame me, I voted for Johnson(L) in 2016.

Truth is dangerous... especially when it challenges those in power.
ID: 1186969 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 9 · 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Occupy Wall Street


 
©2021 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.