RIP School Survival Forums
August 2001 - June 2017

The School Survival Forums are permanently retired. If you need help with quitting school, unsupportive parents or anything else, there is a list of resources on the Help Page.

If you want to write about your experiences in school, you can write on our blog.

To everyone who joined these forums at some point, and got discouraged by the negativity and left after a while (or even got literally scared off): I'm sorry.

I wasn't good enough at encouraging people to be kinder, and removing people who refuse to be kind. Encouraging people is hard, and removing people creates conflict, and I hate conflict... so that's why I wasn't better at it.

I was a very, very sensitive teen. The atmosphere of this forum as it is now, if it had existed in 1996, would probably have upset me far more than it would have helped.

I can handle quite a lot of negativity and even abuse now, but that isn't the point. I want to help people. I want to help the people who need it the most, and I want to help people like the 1996 version of me.

I'm still figuring out the best way to do that, but as it is now, these forums are doing more harm than good, and I can't keep running them.

Thank you to the few people who have tried to understand my point of view so far. I really, really appreciate you guys. You are beautiful people.

Everyone else: If after everything I've said so far, you still don't understand my motivations, I think it's unlikely that you will. We're just too different. Maybe someday in the future it might make sense, but until then, there's no point in arguing about it. I don't have the time or the energy for arguing anymore. I will focus my time and energy on people who support me, and those who need help.

-SoulRiser

The forums are mostly read-only and are in a maintenance/testing phase, before being permanently archived. Please use this time to get the contact details of people you'd like to keep in touch with. My contact details are here.

Please do not make a mirror copy of the forums in their current state - things will still change, and some people have requested to be able to edit or delete some of their personal info.


Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Left Communism
Author Message
DeadorAlive Offline
The Other DOA

Posts: 117
Joined: Apr 2014
Thanks: 24
Given 23 thank(s) in 15 post(s)
Post: #31
Left Communism

[Image: Dictator-ship_28015b_3173211.jpg]

[Image: eat_my_train_shit__animated__by_leonartisan-d7px68f.gif]
I missed my old username
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2014 12:10 PM by DeadorAlive.)
05-13-2014 12:10 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
 Thanks given by: Trar
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #32
Left Communism

I don't consider Hitler or Stalin proles, but whatever floats your boat, I guess (I hope it sinks.).
05-13-2014 12:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
brainiac3397 Offline
Machiavellian Amoeba

Posts: 9,823
Joined: Feb 2013
Thanks: 20
Given 1983 thank(s) in 1428 post(s)
Post: #33
Left Communism

ROW ROW ROW YER BOAT!

Personality DNA Report
(06-14-2013 08:02 AM)Potato Wrote:  watch the fuq out, we've got an "intellectual" over here.

Hidden stuff:
[Image: watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme-240x180.png]
Brainiac3397's Mental Health Status Log Wrote:[Image: l0Iy5HKskJO5XD3Wg.gif]
05-13-2014 01:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #34
RE: Left Communism

(05-13-2014 12:04 PM)I Must Enter a Username Wrote:  
(05-13-2014 11:55 AM)DeadorAlive Wrote:  
(04-08-2014 10:45 AM)brainiac3397 Wrote:  Democracy is idealy great but it's not working...

We could all use a dictator.

Dictator...-ship of the proletariat, yo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
05-13-2014 02:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #35
RE: Left Communism

(05-13-2014 02:26 PM)W Kuts Wrote:  
(05-13-2014 12:04 PM)I Must Enter a Username Wrote:  
(05-13-2014 11:55 AM)DeadorAlive Wrote:  
(04-08-2014 10:45 AM)brainiac3397 Wrote:  Democracy is idealy great but it's not working...

We could all use a dictator.

Dictator...-ship of the proletariat, yo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

yo, chill out, Bakunin,

Anyway, Marx, I think, saw the Paris Commune as a dictatorship of the proletariat.
Council communists notably opposed the Leninist take on the DOTP and probably the whole concept of it.
05-14-2014 02:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
brainiac3397 Offline
Machiavellian Amoeba

Posts: 9,823
Joined: Feb 2013
Thanks: 20
Given 1983 thank(s) in 1428 post(s)
Post: #36
RE: Left Communism

I believe in the theory that there can be no more than one ruler. One clear voice surpasses the voice of many(as the possibility of many unanimously agreeing is obviously lower than an individual agreeing unanimously with his own decision).

Perhaps a city state held together by communal bonds and individualistic cooperation would be possible.

I have to go refresh myself on topics of minarchism,anarcho-capitalism,anarcho-communism and such to get a clearer idea of what Im trying to experiment with.

Personality DNA Report
(06-14-2013 08:02 AM)Potato Wrote:  watch the fuq out, we've got an "intellectual" over here.

Hidden stuff:
[Image: watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme-240x180.png]
Brainiac3397's Mental Health Status Log Wrote:[Image: l0Iy5HKskJO5XD3Wg.gif]
05-14-2014 09:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Trar Away
R.I.P.

Posts: 1,437
Joined: Jun 2008
Thanks: 1384
Given 189 thank(s) in 125 post(s)
Post: #37
Left Communism

I'll just pop in and share this article I read a little while ago about democracy.

Basically, it posits (among other things) that a strong democracy replies more than just giving the citizens the ability to vote for their leaders. A strong democracy has checks and balances and a strong constitution in place to limit the power of government, and to preclude (most) injustice and corruption. A modern democracy would also combine direct citizen input with technocratic methods, to balance each other out and get the best of both worlds. (Ideally, at least.) It also points out that democracy must change in accordance with the world at large in order to stay strong and successful, and it would be rather foolish to ignore or try to stem globalism. People should also be able to examine and criticize their government, and foreign leaders need to voice their concern if they see issue.

The article also brings up fiscal pragmatism. This is where the article flounders a bit: the solutions it proposes for the modern economy don't mention more obvious things that could and should be done: raising taxes on the ultrarich, strengthening unions, and other things I could go on about. It also mentions the burgeoning size of government without mentioning social programs that help a great many people. (For the record, I support a government that is efficient as possible and cuts down on unnecessary spending, waste and fraud whenever it can. There's certainly work to be done for the current US government, but social programs are hardly the biggest burden, and they're important for many people as well.)

Oh, before I go: raising the minimum wage enough will reduce dependency on government assistance. Because, you know, people working for minimum wage can afford more food. Which will drive more consumer spending and further help the economy. Who says I hate capitalism completely?
(This post was last modified: 05-14-2014 12:39 PM by Trar.)
05-14-2014 12:39 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #38
Left Communism

"Who says I hate capitalism completely?"
No one.
05-14-2014 01:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
 Thanks given by: Trar
Trar Away
R.I.P.

Posts: 1,437
Joined: Jun 2008
Thanks: 1384
Given 189 thank(s) in 125 post(s)
Post: #39
RE: Left Communism

(05-14-2014 01:55 PM)I Must Enter a Username Wrote:  "Who says I hate capitalism completely?"
No one.

Thank you.
05-14-2014 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
brainiac3397 Offline
Machiavellian Amoeba

Posts: 9,823
Joined: Feb 2013
Thanks: 20
Given 1983 thank(s) in 1428 post(s)
Post: #40
RE: Left Communism

(05-14-2014 01:55 PM)I Must Enter a Username Wrote:  "Who says I hate capitalism completely?"
No one.

Naive Idealists?

Personality DNA Report
(06-14-2013 08:02 AM)Potato Wrote:  watch the fuq out, we've got an "intellectual" over here.

Hidden stuff:
[Image: watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme-240x180.png]
Brainiac3397's Mental Health Status Log Wrote:[Image: l0Iy5HKskJO5XD3Wg.gif]
05-15-2014 09:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #41
Left Communism

Here's something I found about the council communists:
http://libcom.org/files/dutchleft.pdf (403 pages total)
(This post was last modified: 06-15-2014 08:17 AM by I Must Enter a Username.)
06-15-2014 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #42
RE: Left Communism

(05-14-2014 12:39 PM)Trar Wrote:  Oh, before I go: raising the minimum wage enough will reduce dependency on government assistance. Because, you know, people working for minimum wage can afford more food. Which will drive more consumer spending and further help the economy. Who says I hate capitalism completely?

So pricing some low skilled people out of the job market entirely, thus meaning they will have no income, will make these people less reliant on the welfare state?

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
06-16-2014 11:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #43
RE: Left Communism

(06-15-2014 08:16 AM)I Must Enter a Username Wrote:  Here's something I found about the council communists:
http://libcom.org/files/dutchleft.pdf (403 pages total)

And on the Bordigists/Italian left communists:
http://libcom.org/files/p.bourrinet%20-%...urrent.pdf (202 pages total)
06-16-2014 12:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WalterScottDempsey Offline
Renegade

Posts: 82
Joined: May 2014
Thanks: 1
Given 51 thank(s) in 31 post(s)
Post: #44
Left Communism

[Image: EgjySMC.png]

[Image: H2vRruh.gif]
06-16-2014 01:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #45
RE: Left Communism

(06-16-2014 01:35 PM)WalterScottDempsey Wrote:  [Image: EgjySMC.png]

[Image: H2vRruh.gif]



Watch on YouTube

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
06-16-2014 01:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WalterScottDempsey Offline
Renegade

Posts: 82
Joined: May 2014
Thanks: 1
Given 51 thank(s) in 31 post(s)
Post: #46
Left Communism

I'll have a double hambougeoisie with cheese.
06-16-2014 01:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Absnt Offline
Fanatic

Posts: 6,075
Joined: Dec 2009
Thanks: 13
Given 184 thank(s) in 127 post(s)
Post: #47
RE: Left Communism

I think we might be headed towards industrial communitarian systems in the long-run, anyway. Hopefully. Like there's examples of corporations being run in a worker-based way all over the U.S, and realistically that's the best way I see for moving forward. People should be starting corporations and companies that make the workers shareholders, and the workers should have a percentage of the company to themselves. That'd be ideal right now, anyway. In the long term, ownership by the workers completely slowly reducing the need for a heirarchy model is what I want to see.


As far as the minimum wage goes, I think it stands to reason it can and should be raised in most places. Studies show it won't effect low-wage workers much unless the rasie is brought on instantly without time to prepare / without slowly bringing it up and unless it's brought up TOO much. Like increasing it to like 10 bucks wouldn't cause any problems, according to most of the economic studies I've read. Pretty sure it could go a higher than 10 without causing problems, too. I forget.

Blog I post to now:
http://blog.darknedgy.net

Edfreedom.org -- An organization for more freedom in education.
http://www.edfreedom.org/join-us/
06-16-2014 02:52 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #48
RE: Left Communism

(06-16-2014 02:52 PM)Absentinsomniac Wrote:  As far as the minimum wage goes, I think it stands to reason it can and should be raised in most places. Studies show it won't effect low-wage workers much unless the rasie is brought on instantly without time to prepare / without slowly bringing it up and unless it's brought up TOO much. Like increasing it to like 10 bucks wouldn't cause any problems, according to most of the economic studies I've read. Pretty sure it could go a higher than 10 without causing problems, too. I forget.
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013...f_sel.html

The whole article is interesting but this is the most important part:
Quote:Research doesn't have to officially be about the minimum wage to be highly relevant to the debate. All of the following empirical literatures support the orthodox view that the minimum wage has pronounced disemployment effects:

1. The literature on the effect of low-skilled immigration on native wages. A strong consensus finds that large increases in low-skilled immigration have little effect on low-skilled native wages. David Card himself is a major contributor here, most famously for his study of the Mariel boatlift. These results imply a highly elastic demand curve for low-skilled labor, which in turn implies a large disemployment effect of the minimum wage.

This consensus among immigration researchers is so strong that George Borjas titled his dissenting paper "The Labor Demand Curve Is Downward Sloping." If this were a paper on the minimum wage, readers would assume Borjas was arguing that the labor demand curve is downward-sloping rather than vertical. Since he's writing about immigration, however, he's actually claiming the labor demand curve is downward-sloping rather than horizontal!

2. The literature on the effect of European labor market regulation. Most economists who study European labor markets admit that strict labor market regulations are an important cause of high long-term unemployment. When I ask random European economists, they tell me, "The economics is clear; the problem is politics," meaning that European governments are afraid to embrace the deregulation they know they need to restore full employment. To be fair, high minimum wages are only one facet of European labor market regulation. But if you find that one kind of regulation that raises labor costs reduces employment, the reasonable inference to draw is that any regulation that raises labor costs has similar effects - including, of course, the minimum wage.

3. The literature on the effects of price controls in general. There are vast empirical literatures studying the effects of price controls of housing (rent control), agriculture (price supports), energy (oil and gas price controls), banking (Regulation Q) etc. Each of these literatures bolsters the textbook story about the effect of price controls - and therefore ipso facto bolsters the textbook story about the effect of price controls in the labor market.

If you object, "Evidence on rent control is only relevant for housing markets, not labor markets," I'll retort, "In that case, evidence on the minimum wage in New Jersey and Pennsylvania in the 1990s is only relevant for those two states during that decade." My point: If you can't generalize empirical results from one market to another, you can't generalize empirical results from one state to another, or one era to another. And if that's what you think, empirical work is a waste of time.

4. The literature on Keynesian macroeconomics. If you're even mildly Keynesian, you know that downward nominal wage rigidity occasionally leads to lots of involuntary unemployment. If, like most Keynesians, you think that your view is backed by overwhelming empirical evidence, I have a challenge for you: Explain why market-driven downward nominal wage rigidity leads to unemployment without implying that a government-imposed minimum wage leads to unemployment. The challenge is tough because the whole point of the minimum wage is to intensify what Keynesians correctly see as the fundamental cause of unemployment: The failure of nominal wages to fall until the market clears.

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
06-16-2014 03:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Absnt Offline
Fanatic

Posts: 6,075
Joined: Dec 2009
Thanks: 13
Given 184 thank(s) in 127 post(s)
Post: #49
RE: Left Communism

So this guy is basically saying the minimum wage is harmful, the empirical evidence is irrelevant and wrong, the generally accepted social science on this topic is possibly wrong, and because there's studies on OTHER subjects that may effect this, he's right? I'm not buying it.


Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and stick with the consensus: http://www.cepr.net/documents/publicatio...013-02.pdf

Blog I post to now:
http://blog.darknedgy.net

Edfreedom.org -- An organization for more freedom in education.
http://www.edfreedom.org/join-us/
06-16-2014 03:50 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #50
Left Communism

He didn't say the empirical evidence is irrelevant and wrong, he said that empirical evidence is not perfect (in social sciences). And studies on other (related) subjects can give us quite a few lessons on the minimum wage.

There's research in demonstrating deleterious effects of the minimum wage:
NBER: "Overall, our results generally are consistent with the view that minimum wages cause employment losses among youth."

NBER: "In the French case, albeit imprecisely estimated, a 1% increase in the real minimum wage decreases the employment probability of a young man currently employed at the minimum wage by 2.5%. In the United States, a decrease in the real minimum of 1% increases the probability that a young man employed at the minimum wage came from nonemployment by 2.2%."

And there is not a consensus among economists concerning if the minimum wage is beneficial or not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wag...economists

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
06-16-2014 04:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #51
RE: Left Communism

(06-16-2014 01:35 PM)WalterScottDempsey Wrote:  [Image: EgjySMC.png]

[Image: H2vRruh.gif]

Wouldn't Stalin be an honorary commie killer? (Honorary only due to the fact of his own commie-ness) (If what one Stalinist claimed is correct about it being Yagoda's and/or Yezhov's fault, then that would fall under criminal negligence and surely conspiracy since Stalin could not possibly be unaware of the extreme excess of the purges since its inception, correct?)

Something's very interesting to me about the fate of those who bored names like Boris Hessen, Evgeny Pashukanis, David Riazanov, or Isaak Illich Rubin eventually becoming to be regarded as only figments of the "Trotskyite-Rightist-Nazi's" imagination (and later to the Khrushchev-Gorbachev years, many "rehabilitated" Marxists seemed to have remained insignificant in official studies) and how the Trotskyists and the left communists and the social democratic liberals and the anarchists began theorizing furiously over this and what it meant for Marxism to be associated with the image of "actually existing socialism".

Obviously most here will disagree with the following (and I'm not going to debate as I am still learning the very basics), but interestingly, Helena Sheehan, in her book Marxism and the Philosophy of Science, said in her paperback introduction,
Hidden stuff:
"Arguably, Marxism is still the only mode of thought capable of coming to terms with the complexities of contemporary experience. It is still unsurpassed in its capacity for clarity, coherence, comprehensiveness, and credibility. Within its resources are perhaps the only possibilities for penetrating the meaning even of events that its previous adherents never anticipated. The potency of Marxism is not so much in any of its existing tenets as in its habit of large-scale and deep-rooted thinking, discerning the trajectory of history as it comes, looking for a pattern of interconnections where others see only random chaos, going back further into the past, reaching wider within the present, facing with greater composure into the future.
Marxism may be rejected, but it has not been refuted. It still needs to be seriously studied and critically considered. Books such as this still deserve to be read and the story they tell reassessed and reappropriated.
Marxism may be repudiated, but it resonates nevertheless."
(This post was last modified: 06-17-2014 12:21 PM by I Must Enter a Username.)
06-17-2014 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Absnt Offline
Fanatic

Posts: 6,075
Joined: Dec 2009
Thanks: 13
Given 184 thank(s) in 127 post(s)
Post: #52
RE: Left Communism

(06-16-2014 04:48 PM)W Kuts Wrote:  He didn't say the empirical evidence is irrelevant and wrong, he said that empirical evidence is not perfect (in social sciences). And studies on other (related) subjects can give us quite a few lessons on the minimum wage.

He's implying it's (probably) wrong... If he wasn't, then he would agree with it.

Quote:There's research in demonstrating deleterious effects of the minimum wage:
NBER: "Overall, our results generally are consistent with the view that minimum wages cause employment losses among youth."

NBER: "In the French case, albeit imprecisely estimated, a 1% increase in the real minimum wage decreases the employment probability of a young man currently employed at the minimum wage by 2.5%. In the United States, a decrease in the real minimum of 1% increases the probability that a young man employed at the minimum wage came from nonemployment by 2.2%."

And there is not a consensus among economists concerning if the minimum wage is beneficial or not: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wag...economists

There may not be a consensus among economists but there is amongst the relevant literature. I'm not qualified (see: too lazy) to determine weather the stuff he said is relevant actually is, but I can tell you most of the recent studies all point to modest increases in the minimum wage having close to zero effect, as per the cepr review. You can go on google scholar and read the first few, change the parameters to recent ones, read those, and generally what I'm finding is that most of them figure there's either a small or nill impact. Also I feel like you can't just grab some studies that seem relevant and not look at them and see what needs controlled. There's other variables involved that could change how said studies actually directly impact employment. Gut reaction..

Scholar examples:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...ated=false

http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/...6HqxKaWO00

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.11...x/abstract

Either way, in order for the minimum wage to NOT be raised, I'd argue it would have to hurt people more than it helps. In a purely accounting sense, if less money is lost via the supposed unemployment you're arguing than is gained by the higher income of those working minimum wage jobs, I think there's still a case for raising it. In an economic sense there's probably other measures, but as long as raising it has more benefits, why not?

In any case, I'm still not convinced by any stretch that the minimum wage is infact impacted largely by modest increases. Granted, I don't know that a sweeping federal change is a good idea since prices in areas are different than in other areas, and it could hurt small businesses who already have a low-budget for operating, and I think it'd be wise to wait until we reach somewhere around full-employment to start doing shit like this, but overall my assesment hasn't changed.

We should also look at the history of the minimum wage, and see how it stacks up. In terms of infaltion adjusted purchasing power, minimum wage today has been falling. This can be evidenced directly from the department of labor. http://www.dol.gov/minwage/minwage-gdp-history.htm

Blog I post to now:
http://blog.darknedgy.net

Edfreedom.org -- An organization for more freedom in education.
http://www.edfreedom.org/join-us/
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2014 06:47 AM by Absnt.)
06-19-2014 05:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thewake Offline
Unconstructive

Posts: 5,917
Joined: Jun 2007
Thanks: 78
Given 296 thank(s) in 201 post(s)
Post: #53
Left Communism

Interesting enough, that first article you link (which I found a working copy of here after I couldn't access the article you linked: http://www.deakin.edu.au/buslaw/aef/work..._14eco.pdf) seems to be a reworking of a Card and Krueger paper, the same two economists mentioned by Caplan in his blog post.

Of course there's been critique of the most famous 1994 Card and Krueger study:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w5224 (this is a working paper but the journal version is here: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2677855)

There was also an interesting comment on Caplan's blog that connects to that:

Quote:You don't find Neumark & Wascher's critique of Card & Krueger's NJ-PA study persuasive? Neumark & Wascher pointed out that C&K used "full-time employment" (FTE) as their measure of employment. FTE counts each full-time worker as "1" and each part-time worker as "0.5", without regard to how many actual hours they work. But the neoclassical prediction about the minimum wage was never about the number of workers per se; it was always about the number of worker-hours. When N&W redid C&K's study using actual payroll records, C&K's positive employment effect turned into a negative effect (although the result was admittedly not significant at traditional levels of confidence). I find the critique of FTE devastating, irrespective of the empirical results.

And a study here that tried to reconcile the two came out with an interesting answer: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23018264
"Our main finding, which is supported by both datasets, is that the controversial result remains valid only for small fast-food restaurants."

Neumark and Wascher also did a review of existing research and found differing results from Carl & Krueger:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf
http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/3...453804.pdf

They state in their abstract:
Quote:the oft-stated assertion that recent research fails to support the traditional view that the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-wage workers is clearly incorrect. A sizable majority of the studies surveyed in this monograph give a relatively consistent (although not always statistically significant) indication of negative employment effects of minimum wages. In addition, among the papers we view as providing the most credible evidence, almost all point to negative employment effects, both for the United States as well as for many other countries


And even if we were to accept the idea that the minimum wage doesn't hurt low skilled workers by impacting their employment and/or working hours, or only has a small effect, then the questions are: does raising it help as well as other substitute policies might? Does it hurt others, like the employer or consumers? Would these substitute policies have an overall less damaging impact if that's the case? Just because something may not be harmful doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.

Also forgive me for using my university access to JSTOR, although you can still see the abstracts and previews there without having it and I tried to link to open access versions of the articles if possible.

[Image: nAOqYk7.png]

[Image: USVWSwj.png]
06-19-2014 07:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
brainiac3397 Offline
Machiavellian Amoeba

Posts: 9,823
Joined: Feb 2013
Thanks: 20
Given 1983 thank(s) in 1428 post(s)
Post: #54
Left Communism

North Korea isn't communist, as per the Kim dynasty.

Personality DNA Report
(06-14-2013 08:02 AM)Potato Wrote:  watch the fuq out, we've got an "intellectual" over here.

Hidden stuff:
[Image: watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme-240x180.png]
Brainiac3397's Mental Health Status Log Wrote:[Image: l0Iy5HKskJO5XD3Wg.gif]
06-19-2014 09:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
 Thanks given by: (´・ω・`) , I Must Enter a Username
WalterScottDempsey Offline
Renegade

Posts: 82
Joined: May 2014
Thanks: 1
Given 51 thank(s) in 31 post(s)
Post: #55
RE: Left Communism

(06-19-2014 02:49 PM)anakin9000 Wrote:  north korae is commnist.
[Image: Keine_pointing_ironic.jpg]
06-19-2014 02:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
WalterScottDempsey Offline
Renegade

Posts: 82
Joined: May 2014
Thanks: 1
Given 51 thank(s) in 31 post(s)
Post: #56
RE: Left Communism

[Image: 87eMYH5.png]
(06-19-2014 03:17 PM)anakin9000 Wrote:  lol i fuckin love yugioh.
06-20-2014 01:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
 Thanks given by: no
I Must Enter a Username Away
DoApocalypse Survivor

Posts: 321
Joined: Mar 2014
Thanks: 91
Given 69 thank(s) in 59 post(s)
Post: #57
RE: Left Communism

(06-19-2014 02:49 PM)anakin9000 Wrote:  North Korea is communist.

Explain.

EDIT: Seems like my opportunity for more shitty duelix answers was wasted for his apparent fetish of exposing pornography to mostly minors on public forums.
(This post was last modified: 06-20-2014 06:04 PM by I Must Enter a Username.)
06-20-2014 04:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Opinions on Communism. rockstarjim22 36 7,301 03-13-2014 05:52 PM
Last Post: Trar
  Communism Alistoriv 18 3,411 05-16-2013 05:27 AM
Last Post: brainiac3397
  Putting Communism back in the running. Absnt 41 11,402 02-04-2012 07:54 AM
Last Post: HeartofShadows
  Anarchy, Communism, Democracy...Isocracy? Lolwut? Efs 5 5,500 12-14-2011 12:54 PM
Last Post: Sociopath
  Why Communism is Dumb ~Mystery~ 33 11,128 05-25-2011 09:28 PM
Last Post: The Desert Fox

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | School Survival | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication