If you believe the humans are causing Global Warming....?

Question

do you also believe that minimum wage is good for the poor?

This is not a blanket statement. I realize that not everyone falls under both of these categories, but I am pretty sure that some do. This question is directed at those who think that minimum wage is good and that Global Warming is caused by us.

How can you completely disregard hundreds (maybe thousands) of studies that find that minimum wage costs the poor jobs and hurts more than it helps while at the same time swallowing whole the fairly recent theory that we are causing Global Warming?

Economics is well developed science while in comparison Global Warming studies are in their infancy.

If you do believe both, how do you explain your apparent hypocrisy?

Source: First try any basic economics text book. But to provide just a few:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg18n1c.html

http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/against/against.htm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Labor/WM19.cfm

Also, keep in mind that many journal articles require subscriptions to view. Start with the above and economic text books.

Elana. Provide your studies. And I would say that based on what is taught in Basic Economics classes, the preponderance of data favors minimum wage having a negative impact.

Answer 1

People are just plain stupid.If you tell a lie long enough people will see it as FACT!All economic factors show that the minimum wage is actually harmful to those it is "supposed to help"!As far as global warming; In the 1970's,we had a big problem facing us,and that was the coming of the next ICE AGE!There were many scientists who had "PROOF" that global cooling was a major problem!The same people who swallowed that B.S. are now concerned with global warming. People also have a short memory !

Answer 2

The impact of raising the minimum wage has been studied since its inception. It is proven that there are job-destroying features of a higher minimum wage. Estimates of the job losses of raising the minimum wage from $4.25 to $5.15 in 1996, ranged from 625,000 to 100,000 lost jobs. It is important to recognize that the jobs lost are mainly entry-level jobs. By destroying entry-level jobs, a higher minimum wage harms the lifetime earnings prospects of low-skilled workers.

The proponents of a higher minimum wage argue that it is vitally important to raise it in order to improve the lives of poor workers. However, the raise will have only a limited impact on poor working families. For example; A single parent with two children living in California would gain only 26 cents from a 90 cent increase in the minimum wage.

To put this gain in perspective, each minimum wage worker earns $4.25 (hypothetical) an hour brings home $3.92 for each hour worked once payroll taxes are deducted. The employer costs of a minimum wage worker is $4.58 an hour when the employers share of the payroll tax is included. If workers could take home the amount of money it costs the employer to hire workers, they could have 62 cents more per hour. Clearly, the California parent would be better off if the tax wedge were reduced, rather than increasing the minimum wage.

In conclusion the campaign to raise the minimum wage will have little positive impact on the lives of poor people. Rather, it is a political measure that plays to a misunderstanding of the impact of higher minimum wages.

Answer 3

worldwide warming is on the fore front because of the fact politicians found the thank you to apply a clean platform to get re-elected. the worldwide leaders use it because of the fact they found worry-free worry-free techniques to make funds at it. it rather is a made up situation merely like worldwide Cooling interior the 1970's. awaken human beings. I agree we could be extra efficient with our components, and we could continually advantageous and detention center companies who're dumping into our rivers maliciously. i choose to offer up the raiforest destruction, yet to assert that worldwide warming is a severe man made situation and we could harm the yank financial device and bow right down to the the remainder of the worldwide rather does no longer decide on the flow my boat. follow the money in this one and you will see that that is involved with political income and grant funds for those scientists who income off of the government if worldwide warming keeps to be on the front of the subject concerns. seem deep into the Keoto (sp?) Treaty, initially they took jets to a non-significant hotel region. no longer very environmentally concious. THen interior the parameters of the treaty they have a clause that makes it so which you may purchase or sell polution credit. it rather is all approximately moving wealth and breaking down america. it rather is painfully obtrusive, merely seem at peoples time table. The earth's advise temperature has risen .6 stages C interior the previous one hundred twenty five years. Greenland's icecaps are transforming into chillier interior the previous 10 years. The Scientists who do no longer income something on their posisition will inform you that the earth has a organic progression and it rather is what we are seeing. The UN checklist is produced from POLITICIANS no longer an outstanding unfold of scientists. THere are as many or extra scientists who have self assurance that guy in no longer the clarification and it rather is over hyped, yet their voice isn't heard interior the LIberal Mainstream Media. This situation is ninety 9% political, and an attempt to make america a socialist united states of america, and at last communisim. awaken united states of america, it's time to BE individuals. FOR the individuals via the individuals. supply up THE LIES

Answer 4

Site your evidence please.

I too have heard of several hundred different studies
that site that ultimately the economy (at all levels)
IMPROVES due to well placed minimum wage laws.
My studies are better than your studies? No, than
site your studies.

Both weather and economics are within the realm of
chaos theory - and that ultimately means we go by the
preponderance of data. You can't just pick the favorable
studies and ignore the ones that you don't like - you need
to pick apart the methods you think aren't scientific.

"Hypocrit" is not a useful comment in a debate.

Answer 5

Though we contribute to global warming I believe the time table has been moved up about 200 years.

If it was "real" then we could also fend off a coming ice age simply by setting several oil fields aflame thus spewing CO2 into the atmosphere.

The far left needs a platform scarier than terrorism.

Answer 6

Global warming might be a trick by the oil cartel. The planet changes over the centuries. I don't believe that a meteor killed the dinosaurs. I think it was just climate change. I don't think the debris would have hung around long enough to do that. Probably every hundred million years the earth freezes over. It's just a cycle.

Answer 7

I think there is no evidence to support that humans are causing global warming. I don't understand your comparison with the poor, but I have a theory of my own: don't you think it's interesting that the same political leaders who claim to be "champions of the poor" (the libreral Democrats) are the same ones who think we should dump all this money into global warming research? You see, the money is not going to help the poor, it's going to special interest groups who keep them in power. It's their great hidden agenda, and it's time it be exposed.

Answer 8

How on earth is the minimum wage at any way connected at all with global warming?

Answer 9

Economics is NOT well developed science. This economics major and MBA graduate can assure it is a well-studied subject, but to call it science is to over-rate it.

Answer 10

If a hen and a half, laid an egg and a half, in a day and a half, how long would it take a cross-eyed grasshopper to swim through a barrel of molasses?