Nah they don't care for economics and increasing gov income like that. If they did, they'd lower taxes except for tarrifs to below the laffer-curve peak (there's actually 2 'optimal' spots on the laffer curve as the common explanation is oversimplified, there's a more immediate optimal gov-income one, and a future orientated lower present-day rate which then generates increased future returns). But they don't do this. Why?
Because you're working under a false premise, the min wage workers aren't funding all that much when you consider what the cost of welfare and services to them is, and the dems don't care about increasing gov income from them all that much.
What they care about is being perceived as caring about the lower income workers and the unemployed, and to low iq dregs an increase in min wage looks like it does that, all while actually ensuring that many remain dependant on the government. Which increases their power. This is the point. Imagine being able to be seen doing good while making multitudes dependant on you. That's the play. It's about power and personal wealth, not gov income as such.
The rank and file democrats want to be perceived as caring.
The party elites want to destroy the middle class, which is what minimum wage does. Minimum wage work has less value than the minimum wage, which means it's taking money from somewhere else to cover that gap.
The money comes from people who interact most with minimum wage jobs. Most people eating fast food to pay for $20/hr workers are not the rich - they have private chefs. So the minimum wage is continually sucking money out of lower and middle class workers and dragging them down.
Or an example: if minimum wage goes from $10 to $20 and you're middle class making $50/hr then you'd need a 20% raise just to keep up in terms of raw dollars whereas a rich person making $500 and hour only needs a 2% raise. And that's only raw dollars, which are now worth less, so you'd actually need probably a 50% raise which you'll have to fight tooth and nail for and will lag the minimum wage increase.
I find it hard to believe that the higher income and payroll taxes offset the job losses. When the fast food minimum wage went up they just automated everything. Now they have one person person per shift making $22/hr instead of several people making $15/hr or whatever it used to be. There's no way payroll and income tax revenue is higher now. Are they really this retarded or is something else going on? I feel like it could be either one.
While there is a lot more going on, the people who pass laws raising wages have never actually worked minimum wage jobs so they have no idea how the system works in reality. They've never been in danger of having their job automated, or outsourced, or just downsized at all.
So to them its just a funny side effect, while they look at the increased revenue the company as a whole is making after slashing tens of thousands of jobs and consider it an overall improvement.
Governments LOVE inflation and everything that drives it. Higher inflation means they get more money via taxes, they can spend more money and the debt from the money they wasted before gets "smaller".
You're forgetting the part where it forces competition for low-wage work, meaning that the only people who can be paid are people working for large corporations, or people paid illegally under the table. Either way, everyone of those people become part of a dependent client group.
Payroll tax and income tax are the same thing btw. Sure your employer has to pay it, but where do you think he gets the money? From your check. They just don't print it on your side.
Nah they don't care for economics and increasing gov income like that. If they did, they'd lower taxes except for tarrifs to below the laffer-curve peak (there's actually 2 'optimal' spots on the laffer curve as the common explanation is oversimplified, there's a more immediate optimal gov-income one, and a future orientated lower present-day rate which then generates increased future returns). But they don't do this. Why?
Because you're working under a false premise, the min wage workers aren't funding all that much when you consider what the cost of welfare and services to them is, and the dems don't care about increasing gov income from them all that much.
What they care about is being perceived as caring about the lower income workers and the unemployed, and to low iq dregs an increase in min wage looks like it does that, all while actually ensuring that many remain dependant on the government. Which increases their power. This is the point. Imagine being able to be seen doing good while making multitudes dependant on you. That's the play. It's about power and personal wealth, not gov income as such.
The rank and file democrats want to be perceived as caring.
The party elites want to destroy the middle class, which is what minimum wage does. Minimum wage work has less value than the minimum wage, which means it's taking money from somewhere else to cover that gap.
The money comes from people who interact most with minimum wage jobs. Most people eating fast food to pay for $20/hr workers are not the rich - they have private chefs. So the minimum wage is continually sucking money out of lower and middle class workers and dragging them down.
Or an example: if minimum wage goes from $10 to $20 and you're middle class making $50/hr then you'd need a 20% raise just to keep up in terms of raw dollars whereas a rich person making $500 and hour only needs a 2% raise. And that's only raw dollars, which are now worth less, so you'd actually need probably a 50% raise which you'll have to fight tooth and nail for and will lag the minimum wage increase.
It isn't minimum wage it is government stealing your, and more importantly a business owner's freedom to contract.
Once again something that only affects White business owners because the beaners pay their cousins under the table.
I find it hard to believe that the higher income and payroll taxes offset the job losses. When the fast food minimum wage went up they just automated everything. Now they have one person person per shift making $22/hr instead of several people making $15/hr or whatever it used to be. There's no way payroll and income tax revenue is higher now. Are they really this retarded or is something else going on? I feel like it could be either one.
While there is a lot more going on, the people who pass laws raising wages have never actually worked minimum wage jobs so they have no idea how the system works in reality. They've never been in danger of having their job automated, or outsourced, or just downsized at all.
So to them its just a funny side effect, while they look at the increased revenue the company as a whole is making after slashing tens of thousands of jobs and consider it an overall improvement.
One word: inflation.
Governments LOVE inflation and everything that drives it. Higher inflation means they get more money via taxes, they can spend more money and the debt from the money they wasted before gets "smaller".
You're forgetting the part where it forces competition for low-wage work, meaning that the only people who can be paid are people working for large corporations, or people paid illegally under the table. Either way, everyone of those people become part of a dependent client group.
The working poor pay so little tax if any anyway that such aggregate comparisons offer little value.
Payroll tax and income tax are the same thing btw. Sure your employer has to pay it, but where do you think he gets the money? From your check. They just don't print it on your side.
Repeal the 16th amendment.