The current minimum wage is $7.25/hour. An increase of 100% would put it at $14.50. Who's asking to raise the minimum wage to more than $14.50/hour immediately? Certainly not the president. And Seattle's proposed $15 minimum wage will be raised gradually to that number over the next 6 years.
Where (and when) did you get this information? Stafford Co. NH had a disagreement with the state over funding for a home for the elderly poor about 5 years ago. That has long since been resolved.
You may want to think a little more about what you are suggesting, Springer. The growth in use of food stamps is with people who are already working, many with 2 or 3 jobs. There are only so many hours in a day. Are you really suggesting that they just quit their Walmart jobs and go on workfare, getting still more food stamps, and welfare? I thought you wanted to actually fix the problem and help peoepl get real jobs with living wages that don't require additional food stamps?
Springer, you are right. Food Stamp use h increased over the past few years, although more in some states than others. For example, in Texas, participation has increased from 10% to 16% between 2008 and 2012. In Mississippi, it even worse, having increased form 15% to 22%. Likewise in Tennessee, where it went from 14# to 20%. Even in states where unemployment is now very low, the food stamp participation rate has increased. For example, in North Dakota the rate has increased form 7% to 8% between 2008 and 2012.
Certainly in some states, including Mississippi and Tennessee, the unemployment rate is still quite high, but why would the food stamp participation continues to increase? Any ideas?
Here's the big reason for the increase. Many of our biggest employers, including Walmart are paying their employees so little, that they can't pay their rent and also put food on the table. Walmart even pays people to help employees in each store to sign up for SNAP (food stamps). You and I, as tax payers are subsidizing Walmart and other companies to the tune of billions of dollars a year to provide food and food stamps for their employees. As soon as the pay of those Walmart and other employees increases a little, the food stamp participation rate would plummet. What should we do to make that happen, and to make companies like Wlamart show some responsibility for their employees, and toward taxpayers who are now subsidizing them?
How do you suggest we fix this, Springer?
I agree WH! And I think we have only sen a small part of the changes that will continue to happen over the next couple of decades, as w introduce more remote processing and management, along with lots of robots and drones of various sorts. Consider these possibilities which are not too far in our future:
- Farmers using drones ot view hundreds of acres of fields to find problems, and then selectively applying fertilizer, insecticides, and herbicides, as needed, with people in India, the Philippines, or Peru running the drones.
- Drones or robots washing windows on skyscrapers, again with people far away operating them.
- Buses and taxis that operate with no drivers, and with an operator managing dozens of them from Russia.
- Fire department replaced by drones and robots. Much safer and always ready!
- Robots caring for the elderly and children, too.
- Deliveries made by drivelers drones and trucks.
- Teachers in India teaching your children mathematics and science.
- Again, not using robotics, but large companies already speed design work, by having design teams in europe, Asia, and America, working together 24 hours a day.
- Already, 90% of factory workers have been replaced by robots, as well as shifting work overseas. It's not going to get any better.
- Drones and robots are already being used as cameramen that can put cameras where they could never be put before.
Jobs at very part of the income scale are being replaced by lower paid workers, with the technologies of the internet, software, robots, and drones. We must figure out what we want to do with our time, as we are not going to need to use much of our time working. I hope that we don't chose bad options like war or drugs, but if we don't what will we do? And if we are not working how will we produce good incomes?
The rule that Yahoo tries to enforce are listed under the terms of service ("terms" link at the bottom of the page) Things that most often get a post deleted now is any link to anywhere else on the web. Sometimes specific threatening or vulgar language can be deleted, as well. But links are probably what causes most posts to be deleted. They seem to enforce copyright violations, through explicit copying, rather than using links, to the real source. But, posts that copy too much can be deleted, as well.
What an excellent example of how some may misinterpret and misrepresent date for their own political purposes, as they tell a story that is exactly the opposite of what the real date actually shows.
Between 2008 and 2011 illegal immigrants that Obama sent home grew to 2 or 3 times the amount that his predecessor sent back. And Obama could not send back more children (or their parents) at the border, because they were not arriving at the border.
Perhaps you don't remember, but between 2008 and 2011, we had a sever recession. There were no jobs here. The total number of immigrants, both adults and children, dropped precipitously. No one was showing up at the ports of entry to deport or turn back. Net immigration dropped to about zero. Many illegals were returning on their own, and at that same time, Obama was looking for and finding hundreds of thousands of illegals who were already here to deport, deporting more than any president before him had deported.
Lang, if Americans didn't like buying stuff made in China, they would stop buying anything at Walmart. I expect that the owners of the company would notice after a while... The only state that I know to have worked hard to keep Walmart out is Vermont. And they have recently lost that battle, as I think 4 Walmart stores have been recently built there now.
But, Lang, we also must remember that china is a big country. China's population of about 1.4 billion is nearly twice population of both the US and Europe combined. That 100 million additional manufacturing jobs is just 7% of china's population. Back in 1950, we employed nearly 40% of the nation in manufacturing. Now the number is closer to 20% here.
Although China does export some things to the US and Europe, most of what they make stays at home for their 1.4 billion people. The biggest problem for us is not moving jobs overseas, but instead simply getting rid of jobs that are no longer needed.
Jobs are now moving out of China to India, or even back to the US. In a while jobs will be moving out of India to Africa. Yes there is some cheap labor that we need to compete with. The problem is that we really need to be focusing on creating more high paying jobs.
Hi Lang (and WH!).
I agree. The middle class workforce is being hollowed out. Some jobs are going overseas, but most are just disappearing. Consider the constructions of cars.
Fifty years ago high payed engineers would design a new car, and teams of well paid draftsmen would draw hundreds of pages of mechanical drawings of every part of the car, from fenders, to engine blocks, crank shafts, seat mounts, and bumpers. These drawing would be brought down to the factory floor where well paid machinists would make the parts and put them together to make a car.
Now it's done very differently. The car is designed as a collection of digital information. Parts are analyzed and verified using computer analysis. When the digital design is accepted, it can then be networked to the robots and machine tools on the factory floor to cut, punch, and drill the parts and assemble them. A few high paid design and software engineers are needed, but no draftsmen. Down on the factory floor, the number of workers is perhaps 1/10 what it once was. There are many fewer middle managers, and only a collection of people who oversee the operation of a lot of numerical control, and robotics devices which do the production and assembly work. Again, a big reduction in middle class, middle paying jobs, fewer engineers, no draftsmen, machinists, fewer managers and no old style assembly workers.
In the past work (and pay) was more equally divided between everyone. We are going to need to figure out how to do the same thing in today's world, where we can provide for all our needs, with much less work. Otherwise, the people who do get the jobs, and the high pay will have no one to sell what they make to.
Yes, we have moved some jobs overseas where labor is cheaper, but that's just a temporary blip.. (In fact a number of US companies are now moving work back to the US from China, as pay increases there, to the US, where we still have a higher level of automation, and need fewer workers)
Finally, a beautiful day here. The rain yesterday is finally over, and and it's bright and sunny. - time for a picnic!
Also, I've assumed nothing. It's just the way the math works out. As i showed earlier, even 1 billion cars would produce less water vapor in a day than Lake Michigan does - and worldwide, we don't even have 1 billion cars now. It's also physically impossible to double the water vapor in the air in most places. On a good day in places like Michigan, the atmospheric humidity is about 60%. On a bad day (when it's raining) the humidity is 100%. Doubling the humidity in places like Michigan is physically impossible, especially given the amount of water that such cars would produce.
Currently, gas burning cars produce exhaust that is composed of nitrogen (71%), CO2 (14%), and water vapor (12%), plus trace components that are mostly pollutants. Note that the water vapor produced by today's cars is completely insignificant and never much considered, while it's the CO2 that is causing problems now. Producing 10 times as much water vapor with our cars in the future would continue to be insignificant, but all rational analyses, so far.
Actually, right now, about 90% of our hydrogen gas is produced from methane and other hydrocarbons using a high temperature steam reforming process. The only advantage is that it is done in a single location, were CO2 sequestration could be more easily done.
There are a lot of plans to use electrolysis as a way to store solar energy for times when it might be used, and the solar energy is unavailable. It's in the works, but until there is more solar electricity available, and a greater demand for the hydrogen, we will wait.
But, in any case, it would be very hard to put enough water vapor in the air to even increase the occurrence of rainfalls (otherwise, we'd be already doing it over our deserts)!
Since WWII, our economy and stock markets have operated in one of two different modes. The first mode is one where we are investing in and upgrading our infrastructure and businesses, creating in new technologies, and strengthening and improving our basic transportation, communications, and energy infrastructure components. In this mode our economy and stock markets are growing strongly. In the other mode the economy and stock markets flatten out, and we are struggling through a weak economy, Each mode seems to last a decade or two.
At present, we have been living through about 15 years of a weak economy and flat markets. Every sector of our infrastructure is deteriorating, and new technologies are being developed, but have not yet been used to any great degree. Before that, we had a quickly growing economy and stock markers, that lasted from about 1985 to about 2000, based on high-tech and communications technologies, mostly.
Before that, we experienced a flat economy in the 1970's, and strong, quickly growing markets in the 1950's.
If history and the charts mean anything, it sure looks like we will again see a strongly growing economy over the next decade or so, as we repair our creaky infrastructure, and create new ways to generate and use energy. Based on this observation, I'd say that if there was any time one should be fully invested, now is it!
First, Happy 4th of July!
Also, when considering the effects of water vapor there are 2 things you need to remember:
1. Unlike CO2 which could theoretically grow to be 100% of the earth's atmosphere, water vapor can only increase to the dew point, where the water will condense out into rain.
2. Those cars will still not add much water vapor to the air, compared with something like Lake Michigan, for example. Consider that one acre of surface water will evaporate about 2,000 gallons of water into the air every day. This is an rough average, as the rate varies a lot depending on temperature, elevation, and the current humidity level. Now, Lake Michigan is more than 14 million acres in size, so it adds lots of water vapor to the air every day. (And when it's raining, I'm sure that some water gets a chance to evaporate 2 or 3 times in a single day!) Then consider the other Great Lakes, the US rivers, and other lakes, and oceans. So, Lake Michigan evaporates roughly 25 billion gallons of water into the atmosphere every day, that's about 0.002% of the lake's total volume. So, if that hydrogen burning car produced 25 gallons of water when a full tank was burned, then just to equal what Lake Michigan evaporated, you'd need to drive 1 billion cars enough to empty the tank every day. But, you've got a few more lakes around Michigan, so you'd need a few more cars to come anywhere near the water vapor produced by your nearby lakes.
I'll leave it as an exercise for you : ) to estimate the additional water that evaporates from the soil, tree and plant leaves, and in the breath of animals, bugs, and other land creatures.
Cars that produce only water vapor will have essentially no impact on atmospheric water vapor!
Rah, I'm not sure who's 6 years you are talking about. I said that my investments are better now than they were just before the crash, and i also said that we've been living off my investments (at a rate of $80K or more a year. sometimes a lot more) for the past 6+ years. So, who were you talking about??
Imagine that! The labor participation rate was above 60 during the years that the baby boomers were of a prime working age. (20 years old - 60 years old) Before that, during Eisenhower's and Kennedy's terms, the participation rate was about 58%. And guess what? The participation rate will drop to 58% again, over the next 10 years or so, regardless of who is president. Imagine that! The baby boomers are retiring!
Why not use them when the majority of the illegals are coming over the border, instead of the southern border when less than half the illegals arrive. So post them at the Houston port, the Canadian border, O'Hare airport, and al the other places that the majority of illegals are actually using. But, you are right - shooting children from the air does seem so --- well so Springer..
As long as they keep buying, they should do fine. I was buying in 2008 just before the crash, but even those investments aregreen now, especially when dividends are considered.
Springer: "Do the math."
Exactly! Do the math. 10 years ago we were using 21 million barrels of oil a day in the US. Over the past year, we are at about 18 million barrels a day. Yes, population and vehicles have increased, but oil use has moved in the opposite direction. We've increased efficiencies, and found alternatives, too.
Do the math. Maybe you can find someone here to help if you need it.
Good Morning, Lang!
You must know that that is me! I have sold nothing since, almost forever, except for recent sales, now that i am using my investment to pay for food, gas, and paint, ...I have not yet sold a single share of HPQ stick, which i have held for years, reinvesting the dividends. (Average cost is now somewhere in the low 20's). I sold nothing in 2008 and 2009, but I did buy stocks and bonds back then. I've lived for the past 5+ years on my investments, and the total value is now higher than it was at the 2008 peak, just before the crash. If anyone asks, I'd always say to stay invested in a broad variety of investments, and to avoid focusing on individual small stocks (my only losses), but instead focus on broad funds.(big gains for me).