New to the Area

doctorj wrote:
What is it exactly you don't like about raising the minimum wage? There are countries with healthy and growing economies that have higher minimum wages in real terms than here, and below that, a wider safety net, such that subsistence level is guaranteed for all but it can still pay to work. I can see that an abrupt increase in the minimum wage would be inflationary and could also increase unemployment; the latter is less of a worry at the moment, and the cost to business could be offset by changes to the tax system. But one way or another, to raise the status of the working poor, it's going to cost money up front, and someone has to make the investment, either by raising or diverting tax revenue or via increased costs of goods and services.

Oh, I agree that raising the minimum wage won't cause the end of the world. My point is more that it is not a serious solution to address the problems of poverty and inequity that you originally raised. Only a small percentage of Americans make minimum wage (3% I think?) so a min wage increase will likely raise the wages of some of them and leave a few others unemployed, and not affect the rest of the poor. Moreover, there's apparently evidence that many people will continue to just work for below the new minimum wage, off the books. I've also read studies that show that young black males are disproportionately hurt by min wage increases. So anyway, what I was saying is that this type of solution is more of an easy, populist, feel-good solution rather than a serious response to a complex problem. Even if it doesn't hurt, it's not going to really help either, just allow people to pat themselves on the back.

doctor wrote: The best thing I can think of for making a difference over the long term is to accept defeat for this generation, and invest in the education and health of the next generation, so that they have a fighting chance of doing better than their parents. Imagine how many more citizens lives would be protected for the same $$ spent on widening health coverage rather than invading yet another country. This is also business friendly, since everyone benefits if there's a healthier more skilled labor pool to draw from. It seems to me like the US currently relies a lot on the education and health systems of other countries, importing workers at both ends of the skills spectrum (including me) while Americans on the margins continue to languish generation after generation in poverty. And that has got to be inefficient, to say nothing about social justice.

Exactly!! I admit that I'm not an expert on health policy, and I think there is considerable debate between experts on exactly the best way to go about expanding coverage, the best way to use the interaction of public assistance market forces, etc. I don't want Canada's health system, or France's, or the U.S.'s either. I hear Switzerland's is pretty good.... Anyway, though, I wholly agree that we should focus our resources on providing education and healthcare and that if done right these efforts could yield real results.

doctorj wrote: [quote=escap]
Where have the halcyon days of Clintonian centrism gone...?

Judging by the antics on Fox last week... "He's back, and he is NOT happy". We can always hope things will improve after '06 and '08.

Yeah, one of the worst side effects of the Bush fiasco is the way his politics has also radicalized the left, IMO. Now it's just two parties battling against each other rather than working together in a dialogue. Have you ever noticed, for example, how the NYT op-ed writers rarely actually write about issues anymore? They mostly just write about how Bush sucks. Our finest journalistic minds and this is the advice they're giving to the country. (sigh)

escap wrote:

Also, Japan invests in its citizens' education and healthcare and environment, paid through taxation

I wish that were true--unfortunately it's mostly paid through borrowing. Japan has ~170% debt/GDP ratio, the highest of all developed nations. It will be interesting to see what happens when it comes time to pay the piper.

I'm looking at the numbers and wondering what significance that ratio has. Italy = Zimbabwe at around 110% ? Australia = Ukraine at around 17% ?
If Japan ran that debt up in Yen-denominated securities at 0% interest rates over the last decade, and now GDP is starting to grow, it might have been a sensible move.

Uh, boys - sorry to interrupt your mutual back scratching session, but

Notice that noone is posting here on the original topic anymore?

Me too.

What, you can't see the connection between cool things to do in Prospect Heights and the yield on the 10 year Japanese bond?