Except that you are taxing the creation of low wage jobs. That is probably not smart policy. People are poor, not because of low pay, but because of NO pay. Most poor households have no earned income at all.
You are trying to subdivide the poor in order to push a solution that isn't necessary good. All poor households have low pay and this includes the ones with no pay. Creating more low pay households in order to reduce the no pay households do very little to help the population of poor households and instead continues the status-quo that benefit business at the expense of tax payers who have to fund government services that make up for the difference.
I would counter your argument by saying that if we reduced the total number of poor households with an increased minimum wage, even if we increased the number of no pay households in the poor household population the overall governmental cost would be lower.
Yet they think raising the minimum wage will increase the demand for low skill workers, they think wage and price controls will reduce demand and increase supply, they think capping surge pricing will increase supply and reduce demand, on and on the hypocrisy goes.
Wrong. They argue that by raising the minimum wage, we lower the amount of corporate subsidy in the form of welfare and medicaid. If they pay their employees a livable wage, we as taxpayers wouldn't be spending as much government money to make up for the difference. The idea they proposed was not to reduce the total unemployment, but instead the number of under-employed workers.
The money not spent on subsidizing the living standards of the minimum wage could (in theory) be used to subsidize new jobs by redirecting that money into actual job creation in the form of subsidizing job training and education or helping with start up costs for industry that serves the nation's long-term strategic interests.
I think the product is dead because of the douchebag glassholes.
I don't think all Google glass owners were obnoxious jackasses, but unfortunately it only took a minority that are to ruin the product for the rest of them.
TBH, it doesn't matter, though you are incorrect on more than a few points: Saturnalia ends a few days prior to Christmas. Traditionally, Christmas begins on December 25th and lasts until Epiphany (January 8) - well outside of most pagan calendars, which centered around or ended on the Winter Solstice (Dec. 21).
You fudged the dates a bit. "Dies Natalis Solis Invicti" (Birthday of the unconquered Sun) was celebrated on Dec 25th. It was replaced by Christmas during the reign of Constantine.
He confused "Copyright" with "Personality Rights". Twenty six states in the US recognize "Personality Rights" and yes the constitutionality of this state-based right has been upheld by SCOTUS.
The neighborhood needs to petition their local government to allow for the street to be closed on one end or even the mid block during rush hour. The neighbors can still get in and out, but the street becomes completely worthless as a route for folks passing-thru.
Just wanted to report my own anecdotal observation that after updating Firefox to 34, my default search engine remained set as "Google" and did not require me to change the setting.
I assume only users installing Firefox for the first time will get the "Yahoo" search setting.
Firefox being open source doesn't mean that there aren't any paid employees working on it. Also Mozilla still has to pay for hosting and other business/foundation related expenses.
Slashdot Mirror
You are trying to subdivide the poor in order to push a solution that isn't necessary good. All poor households have low pay and this includes the ones with no pay. Creating more low pay households in order to reduce the no pay households do very little to help the population of poor households and instead continues the status-quo that benefit business at the expense of tax payers who have to fund government services that make up for the difference.
I would counter your argument by saying that if we reduced the total number of poor households with an increased minimum wage, even if we increased the number of no pay households in the poor household population the overall governmental cost would be lower.
Wrong. They argue that by raising the minimum wage, we lower the amount of corporate subsidy in the form of welfare and medicaid. If they pay their employees a livable wage, we as taxpayers wouldn't be spending as much government money to make up for the difference. The idea they proposed was not to reduce the total unemployment, but instead the number of under-employed workers.
The money not spent on subsidizing the living standards of the minimum wage could (in theory) be used to subsidize new jobs by redirecting that money into actual job creation in the form of subsidizing job training and education or helping with start up costs for industry that serves the nation's long-term strategic interests.
Neither of you needed to be on the road anyway.
I think the product is dead because of the douchebag glassholes.
I don't think all Google glass owners were obnoxious jackasses, but unfortunately it only took a minority that are to ruin the product for the rest of them.
I think a lot of us walked that distance to the school bus stop.
Not really. They say they would like to enforce net neutrality but the politicians won't let them.
I have comcast. Can customer service get any worse or the prices get any higher?
Don't forget the rude people in the crowd who can't pull themselves away from their smartphones or keep their mouth shut.
You fudged the dates a bit. "Dies Natalis Solis Invicti" (Birthday of the unconquered Sun) was celebrated on Dec 25th. It was replaced by Christmas during the reign of Constantine.
It's because the US has both a stable government and a large economy.
Continental finding innovative ways of bringing 1970s technology to customers today!
Slashdot didn't pick the submission because you would read the article. Slashdot picked the submission because it would attract a lot of comments.
He confused "Copyright" with "Personality Rights". Twenty six states in the US recognize "Personality Rights" and yes the constitutionality of this state-based right has been upheld by SCOTUS.
The neighborhood needs to petition their local government to allow for the street to be closed on one end or even the mid block during rush hour. The neighbors can still get in and out, but the street becomes completely worthless as a route for folks passing-thru.
Just wanted to report my own anecdotal observation that after updating Firefox to 34, my default search engine remained set as "Google" and did not require me to change the setting.
I assume only users installing Firefox for the first time will get the "Yahoo" search setting.
Agree. It reminds me of Eve more than a Dalek.
You mean "EMBRACE, EXTEND, and then EXTERMINATE"
Firefox being open source doesn't mean that there aren't any paid employees working on it. Also Mozilla still has to pay for hosting and other business/foundation related expenses.
Wait until Duke figures out that their students are getting the reddit community to do their homework for them.
Their bottom line doesn't reflect this, and their stock value has been in the cellar for quite a while.
On the plus side, the renewed media coverage will add volatility to their stock and investors may be able to make some short term gains.
Groupon still exists.
Flamebait? Try brutally obvious. Where are the Google book advertising?
He has too much money depending on success.
A news release that says a CEO/majority owner will carry on despite the setbacks is like a news release that says water is wet.
I forgot about Chromebooks before I even saw this headline.
That's because they make more money and the Alumni association can expect larger donations from them.