Romney: Hey, Let’s Raise the Minimum Wage!
“Well, different members of my party have different views on those different issues,” Romney replied. “I part company with many of the conservatives in my party on the issue of minimum wage. I think we ought to raise it.”
“Because, frankly, our party is all about more jobs and better pay,” he continued. The former Massachusetts governor said that the GOP must convince minority voters that the GOP has a better position on the issue of employment.
“The Democratic Party has shown that over the past five years of their leadership, income inequality has become worse,” Romney concluded. “And the policies over the past five years have not worked for Hispanic families or African-American families.”
Who is standing up for the idea of letting the market decide what wage is proper? Absolutely nobody — even though the market and only the market engages in profit and loss calculation, and thus determines the allocation of resources that best satisfies consumer needs. Governments can’t engage in profit and loss calculation. Only entrepreneurs can.
Yet here is our 2012 standard bearer preaching interference in the very same free markets that produce our wealth and prosperity.
America rejected Tweedledum and got Tweedledumber.
NOTE WELL: I voted for Romney. And given the choice between him and Obama, I would vote for him again. Unless you’re ready to revolt or secede, you have to work within the system, and choosing the less bad option is always better.
I’m a realist. Many of the things I have talked about on this blog lately, such as secession by red states like Texas, returning to the gold standard, or ending fractional reserve banking, are extraordinarily unlikely to occur, at least before the coming fiscal crash. (Afterwards might be a different story.) I discuss those topics to open people’s minds and begin a discussion about ideas that might surprise them. That doesn’t mean I think any of these things will happen tomorrow. And in the meantime, you have to work with what you have.
But there’s no harm in noting what a poor choice we had. And Romney’s totally unprincipled comments are a perfect reminder.
The Minimum Wage Makes Depressions Worse
Steve57 (e86077) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:32 amI’m disappointed but Romney still would be a better choice again in 2016 than most of what I see in the GOP. They all have warts so far. This is just talk, much as Reagan often promised to ban abortion, I’m sure he never meant it except as a hope, not a plan.
Mike K (cd7278) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:33 amhis understanding of economics is well below that of miley cyrus but somewhat above that of pope francis
happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:56 amI blame the Tea Party
JD (7eac2b) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:00 amSteve57,
You need to watch the overly long quotations. A couple of comments of yours that got hung up in the filter because of how long they were, and I did not approve them because of how long they were.
Patterico (7d6a02) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:03 amRe: Pat’s recent economic/monetary posts–
Every so often one needs to go back to the origins of things. You must ask “how did we get to this point of having to make radical changes?” Examining the early concepts of money in general, and how our current system evolved gives the opportunity to find corrections.
Liken it to budgets (which is related): sometimes you have to go all the way back to “bare metal”, rather than just deciding how much to add to last year’s budget, to get things back in line. That is how you find duplications and errors.
Thanks for the stimulation, Pat.
Gramps, the original (944632) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:05 amHere are some questions. What is the actual “hourly wage” they get when people go on faux SS disability because they can’t find a job in this terrible economy? Or when they go on longtermish unemployment compensation? Or when they purposely have a passel of children which makes it hard for them to reliably work, yet for whom they receive significant “benefits” or “aid”.
What role may wage play in keeping even low skill people working and employed and learning skills and learning to be responsibile for themselves, as opposed to their choosing to sit at home like they see some of their neighbors doing? Do older economic`models still reflect current business economics now that government seems to reward non-work in so many instances and ways, or at least make non work somewhat
elissa (b88a7c) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:19 amlucrativeattractive and less socially unacceptable than before? Should work (in general) pay people more than non-work does? I don’t pretend to know the answers, but my guess is that there is a cost/benefit ratio to this country that has subtly changed and which we need to better study and understand.I was always uncomfortable with Romney. He seems to have no center. He’s an honest guy, data-driven, and probably compassionate. But he knows nothing of history. Like those who voted for him, myself included, he would be working off the principle of the least bad option. The problem is that we are going to need to do some serious thinking outside the “box” (the dataset that Romney might assemble to guide him,) and without some understanding of history, and just how horrific things can become, green eye shades are a poor choice to enhance your vision. Perhaps he will switch parties and run for the Democratic nomination? That would be interesting.
bobathome (413da6) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:22 amRomney doesn’t understand economics. He doesn’t understand a lot of things.
Raising the minimum wage helps people only to the extent that people now are not getting what they could get – and there are a lot of people like that. *
However this would make it take longer to get a job and cause employers to be more choosy. They are far too choosy as it is. You need to have a subset of jobs where there is high turnover. (unions hate those kinds of jobs)
The Wall Street Journal had an op-ed this week, pointing out that plenty of people work for $0.00 an hour – the minimum wage law only prevents anything in between that and a higher amount.
A better idea would be to legislate so that people do not tend to get trapped in jobs, and you can do something so as to prevent competition from driving wages down. A whole variety of ideas are possible, not just a lower wage for teenagers or restaurant workers.
Like a $15 minimum wage – if someone is paid no more often than once every two weeks – or paid late..
Much lower if paid once a week, and even lower if paid that day.
Or a small percentage or a low number of workers could be paid below minimum wage.
Or companies with less than 50 workers, 20 workers, 10 workers, pick a number, would be subject to a much lower minimum wage.
* Interns, volunteers, for example. And business owners can actually lose money.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:25 amI pray he does not run again. But the next President should appoint him Secretary of Commerce.
nk (dbc370) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:27 amComment by bobathome (413da6) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:22 am
Romney … [is] an honest guy, data-driven, and probably compassionate.
Only when the data is spoonfed to him. Otherwise, he’d know that a universal minimum wage is a very bad and destructive idea. Look, too low, people won’t do it. Now, sometimes people will make bad decisions. So what you want is something that prevents people from getting trapped in low wage jobs. Long costly commutes and small pay.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:27 amIt never fails to amaze me how a bunch of lawyers, politicians, bureaucrats and pundits always seem to know exactly how much each of my busboys, waiters, waitresses, bartenders, porters, hostesses, dishwashers, prep cooks, line cooks and chefs should be paid better than I. I imagine their great many years of experience in my (and every other) industry combined with their degrees in the same qualify them to be the sole determiners of wages, prices, costs, supply and demand.
I’ll tell you what. The day they set the minimum price for a Fettuccini Alfredo at $75.00 a plate they have the right to set the wages that produce said plate.
Steve57 quoted above how certain regulations under National Industrial Recovery Act, the Wagner Act and Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 damaged the economy as well as labor relations. They did one other thing in my opinion: they began the slow destruction of entire industries in America especially in manufacturing and textiles. Leftists make laws, set taxes and pile on regulations and then opine how the “evil” companies close or move out of state or the US all together to get away. Leftists really do not understand economics and competition at all. With them everything is politics and of course, force.
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:29 amW signed the last one. Pappy signed one, too.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:37 amSammy Finkelman, if ” and you can do something so as to prevent competition from driving wages down”
would you be just agreeable to “do something” to prevent competition from driving prices down? Didn’t think so. Everyone wants the best price but when it comes to wages everyone seems an expert on a “fair wage” which in no way reflects fair competition.
Odd, if two stores are selling a 32″ TV and one is $100 less that’s okay for you to buy. But if two guys apply for a job and one says “I’ll do it for $5.50 an hour” somehow THAT becomes a damn problem.
Let them sell TV’s for what they want and let them work for what they want but don’t set prices nor wages and above all never pay people NOT to work or business NOT to produce.
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:39 amBut the next President should appoint him Secretary of Commerce.
Uh, no. The next President should close the Department of Commerce. Along with the Departments of Energy, Education, Labor and HUD, for starters.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:40 amHey I’m all for raising the minimum wage. Raise it to $20/hr. Think of all the software/mechanical/systems/logistics engineering (and related fields) jobs this would create. Burger flippers are screwed, but what do I care?
WTP (60406d) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:42 amRomney finally got to the front of the queue, and/or was the last man standing, in the GOP – the best (it would seem) of a bad lot.
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:42 amBut, even he was better than what 50+1% of the voters thought they were getting.
It doesn’t say much about the state of the American Experiment, does it.
But this too shall pass.
One more point. Minimum wage laws have historically raised employment……in China, India, Vietnam and Thailand. Not so much Detroit, Camden, Philly, etc. However, these laws never fail to raise unemployment and push more people into the leftist plantation as do-nothing collectors of other peoples tax money. But that’s good, keeps’em voting Democrat.
This country is finished. Someone turn off the lights. (oh wait, that’s what Obamas energy policy is supposed to do).
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:47 amW signed the last one. Pappy signed one, too.
Comment by Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:37 am
I blame Texas and Maine.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:51 amI don’t support raising the minimum wage, but haven’t found a poll yet where it isn’t supported by most of those polled.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303330204579250473005492880
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:56 am“20.W signed the last one. Pappy signed one, too.”
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:57 amThat’s because we continue to allow know nothing progressives (read leftists) define the narrative. It’s past time we had a real American running for at least one party or all that will be left is one party. Then we’re on better than North Korea.
Do we have bigger issues? Yes.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:58 amRomney’s smart, wise in the ways of business, and committed to America not to some Communist Muslim ideology. If he thinks it’s a good thing to close the Department of Commerce he’ll close it, and if he decides to keep it I’ll defer to his judgment.
nk (dbc370) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:00 amColonel Haiku, economics is not determined by polls of people who have no skin in the game. The only poll in economics is success. However, if the leftists can get support for a $10.10 minimum wage then I’m with WTP, we should promote a minimum of $26.00 and “change the narrative” by saying the Democrats “only” want a minimum wage, we want a “living wage”. Then stand back and watch the Dems scream Bloody Mary.
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:02 amWhere did I say what you contend, hoagie? I merely highlighted what MAY be the reality out there.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:07 am“I would vote for him again.”
The reason I did was my ill-founded esteem for Master Ryan.
Yeah, once again a sh!thead, I’m truly afflicted.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:08 amDo we have bigger issues?
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:09 amWell, this might be one:
Are we ready for the FBI/ATF to reprise the good work they did at Mt. Carmel in 1993?
Somehow, I don’t think the ending will be as one-sided.
Don’t get me wrong, having the Strap Ons in control of 1/3 of government, the 114th Congress, will be better than a dog’s breakfast.
I can stand to miss a meal for a couple years.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:14 amLeaving it to the “market to decide” may be the right thing to do, but there was an awful lot of decidin’ that went on in 2009 due to the financial collapse that continues today, a lot of people hurt. And a lot of profiteering/racketeering by a lot of fat cats who were never prosecuted for what were arguably criminal activities and at the very least highly unethical and immoral activities and who are chief among those captains of industry and Wall St. who preach about putting faith in the righteousness of letting the markets decide.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:19 am30. Second.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:24 am#30: The same folks who argued against bailing out Lehman were first at the bailout window when the dominoes headed their way.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:35 amThe bread line forms here:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/more-businesses-shutting-down-starting_791127.html#.U2t2fEi_48E.twitter
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:43 amMittens was, is, and always will be, an idiot.
he, however, will never be a conservative, and i’ll never vote for him, or any other RINO, again.
sorry, but the lesser evil is still evil, and expecting the Free 5hit Army to vote for someone who only promises part of the free lunch instead of the unlimited buffet is like taking a deep breath of water and expecting not to choke.
besides, until everything goes to hell, the sheep will never look up.
let.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:43 amit.
burn.
30-Along those lines, anyone know what Angelo Mozilo is doing these days?
askeptic (8ecc78) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:51 amA lot of know what he should be doing, along with some of his FOA’s.
BTW, American Thinker and American Spectator are two different publications.
http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/05/was_an_emp_attack_just_tested_on_the_united_states.html
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:55 am34. At some point, one would think, Amerikkka will object to having its rectum torn.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 9:59 amhe, however, will never be a conservative, and i’ll never vote for him, or any other RINO, again.
A Republican is someone who votes the Republican ticket. Which I presume Romney does. Perhaps you mean CINO?
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:12 amwhy do you think they are pushing “Common Core” so hard?
they want to raise generations of more compliant sheep. after all, if you don’t know how to formulate questions, you will never ask any.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:14 amOn the surface, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney seem to have little in common. Deeper down, they are really one and the same. Both men are Big God/ Big Government types, though after his experience in Massachusetts, Romney hides his Big God side. They believe the divine wisdom of God can be implemented here on earth through the divinely guided wisdom of government. Neither has any respect for individual liberty; for them, government is about charity. They represent the Republican Party’s take on Progressivism.
Based on his professional background, I was expecting Romney to be a far more dynamic and intuitive individual. You’d think a big time wheeler dealer would have a firmer grasp of the big picture and posses a killer instinct. He demonstrated none of that. When it came time to close the deal in the general election, he seemed happy to win the steak knives. What a loser.
And, yes, I voted for him too.
ThOR (130453) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:19 amTell us, oh Mighty Thor, what is this Big Picture you speak of?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:23 amContinue to remain compliant and let the old toothless dragons dominating the GOP establishment select evermore moderate candidates and pantywaists like Romney will continue to lose elections.
Fighters win and moderates lose. The examples of George H. W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney are proof positive.
ropelight (c055a8) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:28 amI think what you’re missing, Thor, is that Romney is a Mormon. He’s a Marquis of Queensbury politician in a time that calls for George the Animal Steele. Palin can eat a turnbuckle, anybody else? I didn’t think so.
East Bay Jay (a5dac7) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:30 amComment by Hoagie @15
I was talking about the average or better yet, the 10th or 15th percentile wage. The point being it is not good for people if that gets too low. (although it may be good for some other people)
With prices it doesn’t matter the same way, but I do believe it should not be the policy of the government to drive up the price of housing and it is.
The government drives up the price of college education and medical care, but that is incidental – with housing it is on purpose.
I know why – too many loans have been made against housing, and of course this is a way for people to profit as they age – but this can’t be a good thing in general.
There is no other consumer good – and housing is a consumer good – where government at different levels tries to push prices up. It’s perverse.
Ways of building housing at lower cost probably get strangled in their cradle.
Odd, if two stores are selling a 32″ TV and one is $100 less that’s okay for you to buy.
Or $100 period. Well that was a much smaller TV.
But if two guys apply for a job and one says “I’ll do it for $5.50 an hour” somehow THAT becomes a damn problem.
That becomes a problem because a person working for a living at that kind of wage probably really needs the money badly.
On the other hand if a person otherwise wouldn’t get any job at all, then $5.50 an hour is a good thing. The point is, the labor market should clear, but it is OK to try to push it higher (and even such things as ads will do it)
Although there are some jobs that need to get done that just don’t make sense at a higher wage.
Let them sell TV’s for what they want and let them work for what they want
I’m not objecting to that except that:
1) Real precautions need to be taken against cheating people or not paying them.
2) It is legitimate to try to help people at the very low end get better paying jobs.
3) And if some jobs need to be low, being careful about who gets them.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:31 am“Mighty ThOR”? I like the way that sounds. Thanks!
Mighty ThOR (130453) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:33 amComment by Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:58 am
Do we have bigger issues? Yes.
Actually the minimum wage is an extremely serious problem. It is far too high and/or applies to too many different jobs.
The bottom half dozen rungs of the labor market have been chopped off.
Sammy Finkelman (d22d64) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:33 amNo skin in the game. Obama and Romney want to raise the minimum wage? Fine. Let them live off the revenue stream of a strip-mall five-and-dime. For a year. They can take over the store that already employes the necessary stockers, cashiers, and maintenance staff and give them all raised to at least $10.10/hour. After staff payroll, rent, utilities, taxes, wages, replacement of inventory due to shoplifters and FDA expiration dates, unemployment insurance, workers comp insurance, liability insurance, and fire insurance, the list goes on and on…let’s see whether layoffs begin or whether Obama and Romney start visiting the United Way for a bowl of soup.
Jack (ff1ca8) — 5/9/2014 @ 10:50 amIs there anything that Mitt Romney hasn’t agreed with Obama on?
Will folks now realize that things would be little different now if he had been elected?
Can this put an end to the possibility of him or any other liberal Republican achieving the nomination?
Tune in in 2016 and we’ll see.
jakee308 (f1b953) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:24 amPart of the problem with larger corporations is that departments and divisions have separate budgets. Payroll comes out of one budget, production comes out of another, workman’s comp comes out of a third, long term care for cripples comes out of a fourth, etc.
What employees end up being paid, often has no relationship with the profit the corporation overall gains from each employee, so the employees have even less leverage in negotiations.
Then we can get into the regulatory load that destroys small businesses. Large business can find ways to make profits even with paralyzing regulatory loads. Small businesses can work the cracks not worth the large businesses’ time, but those cracks get patched as the number of gov’t employees increase and need some justification for their jobs.
Gov’t employees outnumber private sector, and are increasing. This is a very bad thing.
Well, I think all of the above means we are in a trap. One where minimum wages are necessary. I don’t think we can break free of it without changing a lot of laws, procedures, etc, that do not seem at first to be related.
Phillep Harding (0ae744) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:37 am“Is there anything that Mitt Romney hasn’t agreed with Obama on?”
Yes.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:45 amEconomically ignorant and politically reckless comments by a smart guy who’s unfortunately spent too much time and inherited money tithing his church and far too much time at the country club. But unfortunately all too par for those particular courses. Detached and cocooned demographics = Idiocracy. Sigh.
Lawrence Westlake (4fc30a) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:47 amHow many of the enterprises, like Staples, Sealtest,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:58 amthat Bain manages, pay minimum wage, it’s up to each company like Subway to make a determination, but mandate, what does he miss,
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-08/thursday-unhumor-minimum-wage-under-10-words
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:19 pmif Mittens really wants to help people by giving them more money, why doesn’t he cut each of us a check out of his own pocket, instead of advocating that the government do it by force with other people’s money?
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:21 pm“Rain falls on the righteous and unrighteous alike”.
I have no problem counting Willard among the righteous, tho no man is Righteous.
“Some exist for no other purpose than to be hunted down and destroyed”.
I won’t name names. It might be considered racist.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:22 pm“(T)hings would be little different now if (Romney) had been elected”
I can think of one thing that would be different, and it’s a big one.
Romney would have pushed through amnesty.
Conservatives are better off with Obama in office because we can use Obama as a foil and a rallying point. Obama’s ongoing leadership also allows us to identify those Republicans in our leadership who stand with Obama and against conservative principles. Without Obama second term, would we know how duplicitous Boehner and Cantor are? Or Cornyn and Cochran? Newt’s harping on the Republican establishment during the 2012 cycle left many Republicans scratching their head. No more.
Conservatives are in a much stronger position going into the 2014 and 2016 elections than we would have been in a Romney-led republic. Now if we can only make it to 2016 with the Republic intact.
ThOR (130453) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:22 pm==Conservatives are better off with Obama in office because we can use Obama as a foil and a rallying point. ==
Oh man! Yes!! I definitely feel “better off” every single morning when I wake up knowing that Barack and Michelle and Reggie and Valerie, not the Romneys, are living in the White House.
==Now if we can only make it to 2016 with the Republic intact.==
Aye, there’s the rub. America got Obama and Holder and Obamacare for 4 more dangerous years.
elissa (b88a7c) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:36 pm#51, Romney donated the money he inherited from his father to BYU for the Institute for Public Management.
Mitt’s father, George Romney had been CEO of American Motors Corporation and a three-time governor of Michigan, and had been a candidate for president in the Republican Primary in ’68.
In an interview with the host of C-SPAN Mitt Romney was asked why his father hadn’t left him an inheritance.
In the January 19, 2012 Presidential Debate held in Charleston, SC, Romeny said in response to a question on the release of his tax returns:
Mitt Romney’s wealth is based on a successful business career largely resulting from the private equity company he founded 10 years before his father died, one of the most successful such companies in the world.
ropelight (c055a8) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:42 pmMitt Romney’s wealth is based on a successful business career largely resulting from the private equity company he founded 10 years before his father died, one of the most successful such companies in the world.
Which would indicate he knows more about finance that the lot of us put together.
Kevin M (b357ee) — 5/9/2014 @ 12:46 pmThank goodness Romney doesn’t follow the Pope, else he would be espousing government directed income redistribution as an imperative. Sheesh!
in_awe (7c859a) — 5/9/2014 @ 1:17 pmHere is a reason why Mitt failed to get the conservative vote out. Many doubted the depth of his conservatism, and now we see, rightly so.
Loren (1e34f2) — 5/9/2014 @ 1:23 pmif you lay down with RINOs, you wind up with Demonrats in office.
redc1c4 (abd49e) — 5/9/2014 @ 1:33 pmWill folks now realize that things would be little different now if he had been elected?
Gazzer (c2c196) — 5/9/2014 @ 1:47 pmWow…just wow!
Obamacare, F&F, Benghazi, unemployment, Keystone, IRS, etc,etc.
Comment by Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 11:45 am
Name one that’s definitively conservative.
jakee308 (f1b953) — 5/9/2014 @ 2:17 pmComment by Gazzer (c2c196) — 5/9/2014 @ 1:47 pm
At this point in time, do you really believe he could’ve done anything differently?
Much of what went on that you mention stopped and is being investigated. Nothing he could say or do would effect the outcome very much. (do you really think he would be able to make the bureaucrats indict themselves?)
Keystone is not that big of a deal. We’re already exporting tons of oil because the price is so high. Gas prices are high because of Banks involved in the commodities markets not because of the lack of oil or OPEC.
Romney would have little to do with any investigations as they are initiated in the Senate or the House.
Obamacare is Romneycare and he hinted he was not going to push for repeal and neither is the House.
And Amnesty would already be law.
What else ya got?
jakee308 (f1b953) — 5/9/2014 @ 2:25 pm2012 is done and over. Some allegedly “on our side” are apparently glad Obama won. (I’m not) Sooner or later are we going to be able to move on to something more productive?
BTW, Keystone is a very big deal for a number of reasons. Frankly I question the conservative cred of anybody who thinks it isn’t important.
elissa (b88a7c) — 5/9/2014 @ 2:37 pmWhat else ya got?
Comment by jakee308 (f1b953) — 5/9/2014 @ 2:25 pm
None so blind, etc, etc…
Gazzer (c2c196) — 5/9/2014 @ 2:44 pmjakee308,
What do you think about the rumors that Calvin Coolidge was a secret communist ?
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/9/2014 @ 3:12 pmSpeaking of Hoagies:
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/Five%20Dollar%20Footlong%20No%20More%20Jim%20Herd.jpg#can't%20sell%20%245%20footlong%20subway%20in%20san%20francisco
That’s the sign that went up in Subways all over SF when it’s new $10.74 minimum wage went into effect 1 Jan 2014.
These people vote for crap like this, and wonder why SF is such an unaffordable place to live. Do they really not understand if they raise the minimum wage, then the cost of doing business goes up, so the price goes up? Actually, the answer is “no.” They think that if they raise the minimum wage you’ll still be able to buy everything for the same price.
They have rent control in SF. They have no clue why apartments are so expensive. They have no clue why people aren’t jumping at the chance to build more.
The average retired city employee makes more from a pension than the average private sector worker. Every year they have more of the former than they do the latter. They have no clue why this isn’t a viable plan.
They have only one answer for everything. Corporate greed!
Oh, by the way. “[E]conomics is not determined by polls.” All science works that way. Enough with the Climate Change consensus BS. Not from you guys, the Preezy. Leave aside for the moment that 97% number is complete crap. Even if it weren’t wrong, so?
Steve57 (e86077) — 5/9/2014 @ 3:16 pmEric Holder could run for prezzy and kick mittys azz.
mg (31009b) — 5/9/2014 @ 3:47 pm63. “Obamacare, F&F, Benghazi, unemployment, Keystone, IRS, etc,etc.”
We’re all guilty of Doh-worthy slips, let’s see if we can guess which item does not belong in this list under any scenario whatever.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:24 pmHey, I spent $13 plus tax on two non-music playing 4-sided Mother’s day cards.
WTF?
‘Spose Willard mighta prevented that?
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:36 pm…and choosing the less bad option is always better.
The problem with that approach is that sooner or later, that’s all you’re ever presented with.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque (85adb3) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:36 pmYou know I don’t think ‘ten dollar footlong’ is going to be as catchy,
Of course, the price differential is likely the result of QE 2, Obamacare, the keeping of the smelt, which has turned the Central Valley into the Gobi desert,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:44 pmThis is the real problem with Romney’s wealth — not that wealth corrupts or makes one evil, but that it makes one numb to and ignorant of economic reality at the margins.
At the margins — the person who will have a job with an $7.25/hour and who won’t have a job if we raise the minimum wage to $7.30/hour — they know better than this. For Romney, it’s a rounding error, and he lacks the deep-seated conviction & principle to know better, so he goes along with the cool kids (the Democrats).
Yes, this made him a poor choice for the GOP nomination. He was, unfortunately, the best choice of those on the list in 2008 and 2012. The obvious solution to this problem is to get better candidates to actually run.
Beldar (fa637a) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:49 pmI’m confused. You’re saying if I had voted for the worst option (Obama) that I would be presented with better choices next time? How does that work, exactly?
Patterico (9c670f) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:51 pmIf dogs could drive…
mg (31009b) — 5/9/2014 @ 6:59 pmAmen. How about Ted Cruz?
Patterico (9c670f) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:05 pmContext means a lot.
Romney is being interviewed here about Republican outreach to minorities and the poor. He was pounded for months in 2012 as being uncaring, for the rich only, and for his perfectly true 47% remarks. The question was clearly intended to put him on the defensive, and he brushed it aside with a classic tactic, half-agreement. Note he didn’t endorse a particular number, or say that Congress should enact it now.
Had the interview been on the effects of regulations on private business, he would likely have responded differently, we know he knows the economics of it.
But of course, those who insist everyone adhere to their strict positions on every issue all the time are always ready to club our own, aren’t they?
And then they wonder why “the establishment” ignores them and regards them as more or less kooks.
Agreed. If a Republican promised to raise the minimum wage and didn’t, the only ones who would care if the economy was booming anyway would be the unions, and they never vote for us in any case. It’s certainly less of a problem promise to break than, say, no new taxes on the middle class, or saving $2500 a year on health insurance, etc.
Estragon (ada867) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:24 pmHey, did you Texans know that we have General Santa Anna’s leg and we aint giving it up? Eat your hearts out.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-santa-anna-leg-met-20140510,0,4442663.story
elissa (73b4a7) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:25 pm#69… hey, Steve, when I want some Boudin’s sourdough bread, fresh Dungeness crab and the bracing smell of urine on the sidewalks and streets, I head for teh Streets of San Francisco.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:27 pmHe may know about finance, as in how to move money around to make money. But he clearly has no grounding in economics, or he would not be pushing the minimum wage.
Mitt Romney net worth: $250 million
George Soros net worth: $23 billion
George Soros is obviously like 100x smarter, or something, and if he says we should do something we should all fall in line.
Right, Kevin M?
Patterico (9c670f) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:29 pmHey you DA kid!!! Get offa my
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:34 pmlawnpost!He’s old, he wants a quiet, peaceful life, and he’d rather buy votes than work for them especially since it’s not his money that he’s buying them with. I saw that in the election. There’s no fight in him.
nk (dbc370) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:41 pm75. I’ll buy that.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:42 pmMitt Romney is a very very strange strange person.
He’s for sure by far the weirdest person Team R has ever nominated for president.
happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:44 pm78. I suppose, like Taft, Cruz could do a term as POTUS and move on to SCOTUS.
I didn’t catch a precedent for dumping a sitting Chief Justice tho. We might have to gift Mr. Roberts a concrete smoking jacket and slippers.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:45 pmI do think one candidate is overripe and likely to rot away to slime mold by year’s end.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/05/09/rand-paul-to-gop-our-voter-id-push-is-offending-people/
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 7:49 pmOn the subject of the post, one thing you do have to hand the Strap On Opposition, they really have their finger on the pulse of macro economics:
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/05/20140509_jak.png
Not!
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:02 pmBeing anti-ID is a Libertarian tenet I heartily endorse, but it’s kind of an outmoded and quaint notion these days.
nk (dbc370) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:07 pmRand got kinda loopy somewhere along the way.
Bless his heart.
happyfeet (8ce051) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:11 pmWow, what compassion coming from a money-monger from Baine Capital. What does he project for all the people his company put out of work permanently?
Mark Dana (2d1ec9) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:15 pmMitt Offshore-Tax-Dodger Romney is the most despicable presidential candidate ever! Nixon was an amateur compared to Romney.
And he has decided not to run again. Wow! What humility!
Not that there’s hope for the Undead, ditching the Gentry brand to champion the Middle Class could hardly be a more obvious path to electoral bliss.
Inertia is an irresistible force with the zombies.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:21 pm92. And here I thought I was a downer.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:22 pmOpen borders and no minimum wage drives wages to zero. I don’t see why I should favor that.
Not to mention the other pernicious effects of lots of unskilled immigrants.
James B. Shearer (9233b4) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:23 pmAre there really people without ID? How do they cash their government checks? How do they prove that they’re really the John Smith who has Medicaid at the ER?
nk (dbc370) — 5/9/2014 @ 8:27 pmYou’re saying if I had voted for the worst option (Obama) that I would be presented with better choices next time? How does that work, exactly?
No, when you demonstrate a willingness to vote for the least bad option repeatedly, that’s what you’re likely to be repeatedly served up with.
You don’t demand a better quality product, and you’re willing to buy the junk that the seller puts on the counter. What incentive then, does that guy have to improve his offerings if you are repeatedly willing to buy the junk?
Blacque Jacques Shellacque (85adb3) — 5/10/2014 @ 12:42 amShellacque is absolutely right. Let me explain how voting for Obama when the party gives us Romney works for conservatives.
There is an asymmetricallity to voting that creates a disadvantage for conservative voters. The problem works like this: conservatives say, if Republican primary voters give us a moderate candidate for the general election, we’ll stay home (this behavior costs the Republican party one net vote); moderates say, if primary voters give us a candidate we don’t like, we will vote for the Democrat (this behavior costs the Republican Party two net votes). This is not a zero-sum game and it promotes the selection of a moderate candidate.
This same problem sometime gets kicked around when those running for office choose between appealing to moderates or to conservatives. Appealing to conservatives is always seen as more risky because it might scare off moderate voters who would then vote for the opposition candidate. Appealing to moderates, on the other hand, has the advantage of not only bolstering the vote count of the Republican, but also shrinking the vote count for the Democrat. Given the costs and benefits, I think the reluctance to appeal to conservatives is perfectly reasonable.
The only way I can think of to overcome this asymmetry and strengthen the hand of conservatives to mirror the behavior of moderates. By voting for Democratic candidates when given the alternative of a squishy Republican, conservatives would turn the political calculus into a zero sum game, with both sides running the risk of losing two net votes if primary voters choose a candidate for the general election that alienates the other faction.
There are other, more obvious reasons for voting for Obama over Romney – see my post above – but this is my principle rationale.
ThOR (130453) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:31 am97, 98. While sympathetic I just don’t see a potential for a fix.
The engine block of our Democratic Republic has for some time been leaking a mixture of coolant and oil and now compression has fallen off so that its hard to get off the line.
Scrape together the scratch for another beater or manage a better option, the only realistic choice is get into a ‘new’ vehicle.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 6:00 amthe problem is the Dems cater to their base, the Gope, (the Clique, the Top Men) recoil in horror,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/10/2014 @ 6:14 amfrom ours,
When the GOP runs a moderate, two things can happen and they’re both bad for Conservatives. Either Democrats win, or Conservatives get stabbed in the back if the GOP’s moderate wins. It’s always a lose-lose proposition for Conservative voters, they never win, the GOP establishment may occasionally seat a mealy mouth double-talking back-stabber, but that kind of win only leaves Conservatives out in the cold and twisting in the wind, yet again.
Ronald Reagan won the presidency twice by clearly articulating a conservative agenda, he won the people’s respect and their confidence, and he flatly ignored the GOP establishment’s advice to tone it down. It worked for him, and it’ll work again as long as our candidate isn’t another establishment puppet.
ropelight (5e61bd) — 5/10/2014 @ 6:17 am“Are there really people without ID? How do they cash their government checks? How do they prove that they’re really the John Smith who has Medicaid at the ER?”
Yes. there are. The pennsylvania law voter ID law would affect hundreds of thousands.
cbuund (74098c) — 5/10/2014 @ 6:25 am==“Are there really people without ID? How do they cash their government checks? How do they prove that they’re really the John Smith who has Medicaid at the ER?” (nk)
Yes. there are. The pennsylvania law voter ID law would affect hundreds of thousands. (cbuund)==
The question at hand “cbuund”, I think once again, is WHO are these hundreds of thousands of people just in PA alone without any ID who live in a country where seemingly having ID is almost a requirement for daily existence. The numbers you post may be accurate. But they are just useless meaningless unverifiable unconvincing numbers on a blog unless you can point to where they came from, and the method in which they’ve been arrived at, and who such ID-less people are who are legally entitled to vote in American elections.
Possible “disenfranchisement” is only one of several reasons to discuss the issue of voter ID. But drop-in talking points without any facts don’t get us there.
elissa (a1c062) — 5/10/2014 @ 7:52 am“Mitt Romney net worth: $250 million
George Soros net worth: $23 billion
George Soros is obviously like 100x smarter, or something, and if he says we should do something we should all fall in line.
Right, Kevin M?”
Common Paterico, we know that’s not what Kevin M meant. I read that to mean unlike our Idiot-In-Chief, Romney has business experience and some economic smarts. BTW so does Soros however, he’s a despicable Nazi enabler and a POS human being. Romney is a genuine good person, husband, father and American.
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:02 amYup. I am a lawyer. I want personal testimony, not cumulative hearsay. Find me five people who you say can vote and don’t have ID and let me cross-examine them.
nk (9faaca) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:08 am==Comment by ThOR (130453) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:31 am==
I’m sorry, but your entire comment is gibberish.
elissa (a1c062) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:10 amWhat the hell does voter ID have to do with minimum wage?
Hoagie (511e55) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:24 amWhy do the Undead keep recycling losers?
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/05/09/Mitt-Romney-Strategist-Says-Republicans-Can-Take-Back-California
Stevens was far worse for the Romany campaign that the candidate himself. What possesses the sheeple to follow these ‘tards as tho they’re doing anything?
Show me you use the brain God gave you and I might listen to you.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:35 amWho the hell are you to ask?
Romney came out in support of minimum wage and somebody up the thread pointed out that Rand Paul said something about vote ID so we’re discussing that. Are we violating parliamentary procedure?
nk (9faaca) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:37 amAnd it takes me hours to type a single sentence on the daughter’s eyepad.
nk (9faaca) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:40 am109. That’s the spirit!
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:43 amFull disclosure, in my private life, at work, I’m trying to be relentlessly positive and encouraging, supporting the positive I find in others, decisiveness when I see it–to the extent that is temperamentally possible.
OTOH, stupidity merits no quarter.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 8:53 amSo employers often laid people off — hence the mostly double-digit unemployment of the 1930s.
I’m also still amazed that various economists, supposedly skilled in understanding how people and money work, have expressed bafflement — at least in the past — about why the US entered a period of long-term stagnation during the so-called Great Depression. I mean when income taxes were pushed up to the 80-percentile level, making job creators throughout America, in effect, the flunkies of government and having to pay Big Brother for all the blood, sweat and tears an employer would invest in creating a business, and experts in economics couldn’t figure out why that would put a freeze on the economy, the response to them should be: And other than THAT, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?
Mark (99b8fd) — 5/10/2014 @ 9:24 amI was always uncomfortable with Romney. He seems to have no center.
The guy is full of squish, reminiscent of Peggy Noonan’s “gentler, kinder America” phrase that was hauled out during the George Bush Sr campaign in 1988, or the “compassionate conservative” phrase used by Bush Jr.
So many people — from all walks of life, of all political stripes — are easily lured into believing that compassion, even when applied cheaply and excessively, is a perfectly fine, wonderful and heroic way of dealing with the various facets of society. Therefore, the growing numbers of people who buy into things like same-sex marriage (and keep in mind that the stability of a culture is a major contributor to helping the stability of an economy) and the US military, no less, with its growing amount of idiotic political correctness.
Mark (99b8fd) — 5/10/2014 @ 9:40 amOpen borders and no minimum wage drives wages to zero. I don’t see why I should favor that.
Not to mention the other pernicious effects of lots of unskilled immigrants.
A divergence of the traditional boundaries of left and right-leaning ideologies.
From a strategic standpoint, and based on opinion polls, because the concept of minimum wage is widely embraced, popular with way too many people, it’s a very tricky issue for the Republicans and conservatives to handle. In turn, being touchy-feely about the issue of the “undocumented” can be tricky for the Democrats and liberals.
In either case, there is plenty of squish to go around and this nation may end up with the worst of both worlds.
I will say that if my community were competing with another community — another city — I’d be thrilled if government officials in that competing region raised the minimum wage as high as possible. In effect, that other city would be Californicating itself and opening a new opportunity that could be exploited by other places.
Mark (99b8fd) — 5/10/2014 @ 9:57 am115
I will say that if my community were competing with another community — another city — I’d be thrilled if government officials in that competing region raised the minimum wage as high as possible. In effect, that other city would be Californicating itself and opening a new opportunity that could be exploited by other places.
I would rather live in a rich community than a poor community myself so I am fine with all the poor people in my city moving to your city. California’s problems are largely due to an influx of poor people, the rich areas are pretty nice.
James B. Shearer (9233b4) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:29 amRomney continues to be a splendid example of everything that is wrong with the Republican party. That his loss to an overt socialist has somewhat galvanized the party in opposition to Obama is nevertheless overshadowed by the fact that Romney is a fool and the Republicans chose this fool as “opposition” to The One. Sure, Mitt grew Bain Capital to be a successful company. Good for him. But does its success reflect Mitt’s shrewd business acumen or, given the fact that we are operating under a mixed (i.e., “crony capitalist” — that is, a socialist) economy, how much does his political connections account for Bain’s success? I personally don’t know nor do I have any idea but this is a reality for all businessmen nowadays and not all businessmen are John Allison.
I respectfully submit that this is where you (and “conservatives” in general) misunderstand the problem. Romney does not lack deep-seated convictions nor principles and he’s absolutely certain that he “knows better” what’s best for everyone. What “conservatives” won’t admit to themselves or anyone else is that his convictions and principles are fundamentally the same as mainstream conservative principles and *gasp* they are also the same as the principles of the socialist cool kids.
Proof? Do “conservatives” want to do away with – not “reform”, not “roll back” to an arbitrary level – Medicare/Medicaid? Social Security? Public education? Regulation of business? Subsidies (that is, transfer payments, “redistribution”) to the “needy”, the “elderly”, students, small businessmen, large businessmen, or farmers? If not, then you want what Mitt wants – government control over it all. He just thinks that he would do a “better” (however Mitt defines that to be) job of it than Obama. These are Romney’s convictions and principles in action and they’re no different than the socialists’ principles. All of these government actions are socialist in nature and violate individual rights. But “conservatives” ignore these violations because they think that the political means justify the ethical ends — just like the socialists do.
If these are the principles that “conservatives” want, then this is the way that it will be, politically, until the nation’s inevitable collapse. When “conservatives” and socialists agree on the ethics of socialism – that is, that we are all our brothers’ keeper – then as a “conservative” you’ve lost the argument for “small, limited government”; you can’t morally justify a “roll back” of the State, except on pragmatic grounds (i.e., not to do so will bankrupt the State.) The absolute best that you can hope for under such a situation is that the State is merely running at a maximum “sustainable” size and not at a deficit. Good luck with running a thriving economy on that model. The Iron Laws of Bureaucracy — that a bureaucracy always acts to protect itself; that it always seeks to grow larger; and that it always seeks to increase its power within the organization — will quickly destroy that little notion because there is no self-regulating feature for public bureaucracies. Their sole purpose is to regulate and they never go away.
It’s easy to say that when you vote for squish, you get squish. But such a notion trivializes the seriousness at issue. The Republicans do not offer a moral, thus a political, alternative to the socialists. And in a contest where two sides agree on the ethical fundamentals, the side that is more consistent (in this case, the socialists) will invariably win, politically. Einstein’s definition of insanity is literally operating within the American political system today and you see the end result in all levels of politics. The obvious solution, then, is to do the opposite of the dominant party – that is, become principled anti-socialists, i.e., individualists and capitalists.
But to do so requires a change, an embrace of a new morality. It requires a rejection of the doctrine that we are our brother’s keeper. It is the only way that it will work. And I don’t think that we’re there yet.
Unfortunately.
J.P. (bd0246) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:31 amHell, put me down for secede.
Ken (92f263) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:34 am“The question at hand “cbuund”, I think once again, is WHO are these hundreds of thousands of people just in PA alone without any ID who live in a country where seemingly having ID is almost a requirement for daily existenc”
There was a plaintiff in the PA case that did not have ID that met the requirements. You can do web searches that will provide you with this information.
cbuund (74098c) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:37 am115
In either case, there is plenty of squish to go around and this nation may end up with the worst of both worlds.
We currently have the worst of both worlds, open borders and a low minimum wage. A higher minimum wage would discourage immigration. Both directly (no low wage jobs for unskilled immigrants) and indirectly (less business support for open borders if business doesn’t benefit from the resulting lower wages).
James B. Shearer (9233b4) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:38 amWhat’s wrong with you doing the search and providing the cite, cbuund? It’s your evidence.
Ken (92f263) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:50 amNuh-uh, cbuund. You’re the one making the “hundreds of thousands” claim. It’s you that needs to prove your case–not just come up with a single plaintiff without even a name, and then send me off to do research. Sheesh.
elissa (a1c062) — 5/10/2014 @ 10:55 amForcing adults to show photo ID when voting is tantamount to forcing them to get circumcisions, cbuuundt.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:05 amNever been to Pasadena but have seen on TV some New Year’s days and know a prof at Caltech.
Its on the far right of the following:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-05-09/which-us-cities-have-highest-income-inequality
http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/05/20140509_income1.png
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:14 amA higher minimum wage would discourage immigration.
James, you do realize that California has long had one of the highest minimum wages in the US. Yet, the last time I checked, that certainly hasn’t prevented it from being nirvana to plenty of poor people from countries like Mexico.
BTW, there’s a saying that “demographics is destiny.” But between the issues of a society’s populace and its politics, I’ll take good, sensible, right-leaning ideology over demographics per se, time and time again.
For example, Argentina is one of the most mono-racial nations in the Americas, with about 97% of its people being of European extraction. But because it has a habit of falling in love with variations of Evita-Peron-ism — liberalism run amok — it has continuously faced bouts of economic decline for generations and, at least in 2014, surprisingly high rates of crime. So although the city of Detroit, on one hand, and the nation of Argentina, on the other, may be poles apart demographically, because they’re both full of bone-headed liberalism, they’re in other ways more alike than different.
Mark (99b8fd) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:15 am119. I gots a fiver, at the moment, that says they all mostly deceased.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:19 amWell, yes, gary. That is certainly one strong possibility that should be considered.
elissa (a1c062) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:24 am118. And seizing any Federal property and suing for non-support over past mandates, as well as evicting IRS employees.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:31 am128. Perp walks to the border could be immensely popular.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/10/2014 @ 11:33 amWhile sympathetic I just don’t see a potential for a fix.
Heaven knows the Tea Party is doing their best to set the Republican Party back on the right path. The problem is that such an endeavor takes time, and it should have been started long ago. The problem is that back then, few people recognized the effect that repeated lesser-of-two-evils choices would have over time on the quality of the candidates endorsed by the party “leadership”.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque (85adb3) — 5/10/2014 @ 12:28 pmCough cough BS cough cough. Hundreds of thousands?!
JD (9cbc9b) — 5/10/2014 @ 12:39 pmSo far, there is scant evidence of hundreds of thousands adversely effected in PA alone, and much evidence that voter ID requirements have had no adverse effects on voter turnout. In most, if not all, States that have enacted same, turnout has increased.
JD (9cbc9b) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:16 pmHang tight, JD. I’m sure our friend cbuund will be right along with all the substantiating data any minute now.
elissa (a1c062) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:23 pmThere was actually discussion of the evidence for this in the court ruling on the PA voter ID case. If you care to find evidence.
cbuund (74098c) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:25 pmIf you’re so intimately familiar with the details of the case, cbuund, it should be trivial for you to put it on the table.
Ken (92f263) — 5/10/2014 @ 2:06 pmSquirrel, I do recall von Spackovsky if not Christian Adams thoroughly debunked that notion,
narciso (3fec35) — 5/10/2014 @ 2:14 pmDon’t you guys recognize this serial troll?
JD (9cbc9b) — 5/10/2014 @ 2:36 pmHe’s so far resisted teh urge to go all OCD on circumcision.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 5/10/2014 @ 2:38 pmIf it is “racism !!!11!!!1!” to require people to show ID at the voting booth, how come the Justice Department never charges motels, rental car agencies, banks, airlines, or public libraries with “racism” for requiring customers to show ID ?
Game over.
Elephant Stone (6a6f37) — 5/10/2014 @ 2:42 pmThanks for playing, lefties.
Elephant Stone –
mg (31009b) — 5/10/2014 @ 5:07 pmTim Whelan is the republican running for state rep. was just at my house delivering some lawn signs and said the exact same thing about id cards. He is a good man who I will work hard for.
125
James, you do realize that California has long had one of the highest minimum wages in the US. …
It’s true California’s minimum wage has often been slightly higher than the federal minimum. However wages in general are also higher in California. So it’s not clear California’s higher minimum is actually more generous relative to the local wage level. I will concede that a high minimum wage is an inferior substitute for more direct limits on immigration but it has the advantage of being politically feasible.
BTW, there’s a saying that “demographics is destiny.” But between the issues of a society’s populace and its politics, I’ll take good, sensible, right-leaning ideology over demographics per se, time and time again.
I’ll bet on demographics. For one thing how long do you expect the politics to stay right wing given lots of poor immigrants. California used to be a safe Republican state.
For example, Argentina is one of the most mono-racial nations in the Americas, with about 97% of its people being of European extraction …
97% is the fraction with at least some European ancestry. It appears Argentina is bit less than 80% European genetically. Still an underperformer though. But for all its troubles Argentina remains richer than Mexico.
James B. Shearer (9233b4) — 5/10/2014 @ 5:21 pm“So far, there is scant evidence of hundreds of thousands adversely effected in PA alone”
When you find the opinion, make sure to not miss the paragraph that starts with “In this case, the overwhelming evidence reflects that there are hundreds of thousands of qualified voters who lack compliant ID.”
cbuund (74098c) — 5/10/2014 @ 6:49 pm132. Comment by JD (9cbc9b) — 5/10/2014 @ 1:16 pm
In most, if not all, States that have enacted same, turnout has increased.
It’strue, but why should that be??
It’s because the effect that voter ID laws have of increasing Democratic turnout becuase of the way it is used to increase motivation to vote, and vote Democratic, outweigh the loss caused by the natural effect of disabling some people from voting. I assume also that there is an extra effort made by some to get people IDs. And most people without IDs may be so cut off from the world that they weren’t registered anyway.
Sammy Finkelman (bcd7c8) — 5/10/2014 @ 7:18 pm143. Moonbeams and stardust.
gary gulrud (e2cef3) — 5/11/2014 @ 4:41 amThat’s funny. Someone claims there’s evidence to support their position, yet it’s up to YOU to find it.
In other words, it’s likely BS.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque (ff472d) — 5/11/2014 @ 5:32 pmIt is total BS. Imdw has pitched the same nonsense before. It is one of its pet issues.
JD (2bc676) — 5/11/2014 @ 6:34 pmLet’s be absolutely morally clear here. If eliminating some election and vote fraud has a side effect of motivating some people to vote legitimately who otherwise wouldn’t, that is a good thing plus another good thing. Even if the outcome isn’t my immediate and cynical desire.
Voting fraud is really just cancelling real votes, which is wrong on a higher level than the error of voting for someone I disagree with.
It is clear that the democrats disagree with your estimation, given how hard they fight against voter ID. But if you’re right, I still think we need voter ID.
Dustin (7f67e8) — 5/11/2014 @ 7:12 pmThe Chicago experience is that Democraric precinct captains have quotas — they have to bring out a certain number of the faithful win by a certain margin. If they can’t do it with fake votes, they increase their efforts to get honest ones. More knocking on doors, more telephone calls, more volunteers to drive people to the polling stations, more promises to fill those potholes in the alley (or, believe it or not, to make potholes in the alley to slow down traffic) ….
nk (dbc370) — 5/11/2014 @ 7:29 pm*and* win by a certain margin
nk (dbc370) — 5/11/2014 @ 7:30 pm“When you find the opinion, make sure to not miss the paragraph that starts with “In this case, the overwhelming evidence reflects that there are hundreds of thousands of qualified voters who lack compliant ID.””
Of course, in case you missed it, that paragraph goes on to describe the evidence that experts presented. Even the witness from the state (the ones defending the ID requirement) came up with about 300 thousand.
It’s also important to remember that the case isn’t about having ID at all. It’s about a specific ID requirement, that some people can’t meet. When you find out more about the named plaintiffs, you’ll hear of a woman who simply can’t get a birth certificate, because her state of birth says they have no record of her birth. And thus can’t get the required ID to vote.
I’m sorry but saying this: “So far, there is scant evidence of hundreds of thousands adversely effected in PA alone”
Is just wrong. And aggressive ignorance won’t make it right.
cbuund (74098c) — 5/11/2014 @ 7:34 pmGo away, imdw. If you said the house was on fire nobody would twitch his nose to sniff for smoke. You have no credibility.
nk (dbc370) — 5/11/2014 @ 7:53 pmFor the serious commenters, what Rand Paul said is consistent with classic libertarian and conservative thought. I grew up with conservatives’ wariness of Social Security becoming a national identification system, of our country becoming another USSR with internal passports. But that kind of thinking is now old-fashioned and outdated, like the kind of thinking that cops shouldn’t shoot 93 year old women.
nk (dbc370) — 5/11/2014 @ 8:06 pmRomney’s problem is the same problem ALL ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS HAVE. They don’t know how to FIGHT the LIBS. The LIBS set the MEME, they hammer hammer and hammer the MEME and hammer and hammer it, until the GOP ESTABLISHMENT responds to a loaded gun and creates LEGITIMACY for tha FAKE DEBATE. Then the LEFT MOVES THE GOALPOSTS as the GOP IDIOT stands there with his pants around his ankles.
Gus (70b624) — 5/11/2014 @ 8:20 pmI believe it.
Over time, we and they get the government we deserve, if we at least have fair elections.
Dustin (b87691) — 5/11/2014 @ 10:07 pmI would point out that if you don’t have ID, you can’t be (legally) employed. Employers must see ID to make a hire. You can’t (legally) open a bank account, banks must see ID of the signers. Those are existing federal laws/regulations.
Loren (1e34f2) — 5/12/2014 @ 7:46 am