Why are you limiting the possibility of also offering a baseline wage?

We were talking about income inequality ... distributional effects. You can make up all kinds of "stories" in your head where you create a bunch more wealth in the economy to justify the increase in earnings for a person. But if you want to think about distributional effects you need to hold the wealth of the economy constant. Otherwise you have too many moving parts and it obfuscates what you're trying to think about. It is literally impossible for me to make this any clearer so I won't try again.

This thread isn't fun anymore.

You should watch The Founder if you want to know how Ray Kroc made his money. Spoiler alert:

that's better...

Okay, you all could start a burger joint that pays employees a baseline wage + commission. Many potential employees would still prefer the flat paycheck especially when the company is just starting and is risky. Many companies already do this so I hope you all don't think this is some kind of new idea.

No wonder why you think income inequality is a problem. Assuming 0% economic growth while analyzing the effects of laws that effect wealth distribution and economic growth is ridiculous.

As an example, people that are pro-tax-cuts like the idea of tax cuts because they believe long-term the economy will grow and therefore tax receipts won't go down and people will have more money to spend. Ignoring their reasoning behind supporting this law is silly - no matter if you believe it is true. You are just having a dishonest conversation.

You're the one who made this claim:

Now you're trying to shift the goalposts and say that the reason your neighbor's income goes from $40k/yr to $4M/yr is endogenous to the problem? Who's having the dishonest conversation again?

Practically nobody believes this. That's why the CBO said the recent tax cut will add $1.4T to the debt.

Holy ****, it just occurred to me that you probably think all markets are perfectly competitive etc etc and that income is a direct consequence of productivity in an economy. So it's only natural that the increase from $40k to $4M is a result of the neighbor's increased productivity - like tautologically.

That's adorable.

lol

People tend not to have huge raises without taking a promotion, changing jobs or creating something very valuable for the economy. Assuming the economy isn't effected by someone jumping to $4m from of $40k (especially in your example of 2 ppl) is illogical.

Come the hell on believing the CBO on projections. I'm guessing you are surprised that a federal agency tends to favor a bigger government?

"While it is true that the CBO uses economic
models that are “politically” non-partisan, it is also true that the
models it uses favor more spending and higher taxation. They
assume government spending boosts economic growth and see
few negative economic effects from tax hikes. These models,
the people who defend them and the politicians that allow them
to be used consistently bias policy toward a bigger government,
with less faith in the private sector."

nope.

Sometimes I forget that online a cliffs notes understanding of Atlas Shrugged passes for economic expertise.

cliffs of your last 3 posts:

you: mickey, you shifted some goalposts. The CBO says a bigger budget for them and the rest of the federal government is good so we all should agree to give them more money.
you: mickey, I believe that you think all markets are perfectly competitive & income is perfectly correlated to production.
hero: I do not believe either of those.
you: you only think you understand economics because you read some specific book
me: I have never heard of that book.

What random accusation is coming next?

half of all muricans have < $1k savings or something like that

Thanks Obama

You're a terrible poster who is once again making dumb political arguments in an inappropriate manner for the forum you're posting in - something that has already resulted in you being exiled multiple times from other parts of 2+2.

Im gonna watch The Founder! per my main man aiott's recommendation

Hey, OP and bahbah booey mickey

MADE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...usa/697199002/

yayyyy expensive soccer festival wooohooo!!

LoL, I just read his user profile. Dude can't even get along with people in POG without leaking his dumb political takes onto the keyboard.

This one's my favorite so far itt. Just so aggressively wrong

GOATrump warned me about responses like this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daOH-pTd_nk

It's as if economic textbooks don't include a passage on scarcity on the page before the production possibility frontier.

Part of me wishes to give in to the bozo reality spoonfed by political happenstance. It might be fun to live with a 2-bit conscience and stack huge piles of cash.

Mexico is gonna pay for it.

Hosting is the only way the US can qualify for a berth.