Shocker In Tampa --- Ron Paul Wins!
These WILL be the headlines next day --- here is why:
According to RNC Rule #38 --- at the Tampa Convention NONE of the Delegates are ACTUALLY Bound! Delegates can vote according to their own judgment and conscience --- and are NOT bound to vote according to how most delegates from their state vote.
Precedent was set in 2008 Utah by Legal Council for the RNC (stating: The RNC does not recognize a state's binding of national delegates, but considers each delegate a free agent who can vote for whoever they choose).
Also, the Republican (and Democratic) Parties are Private Organizations --- so voting within a party is NOT bound by Election Law!
What does this mean? It clearly shows that ANY or ALL delegates can abstain from voting in the 1st round. Or in other words --- Bye-bye Mitt !!!
What do we need to do? Push for as many more delegate wins for Ron Paul as humanly possible --- so a Ron Paul victory in Tampa is assured!
But most importantly NOW --- SHARE this information (spread it like wildfire)!
Like or Dislike: 0 0
Rule #11 shows Valid Grounds for Mitt Romney to be Removed from the Republican Ticket!
It is certainly a Valid Cause to remove Mitt..but even WHEN he is NOT Removed (since the RNC will never allow it), the ruckus caused BY IGNORING THIS RULE will be EVEN more effective as a Publicized Weapon showing Mitt's COLLUSION with the RNC Leadership, in order to CIRCUMVENT the Legal Election Process!
There is a "minimum wage" but still no law requiring it. It is decided through collective bargaining.
So this does not mean there is no limit, but it is not decided by economists or central planners.
Yea, Sweden's usually regarded as highly socialist, I'm actually surprised you don't have minimum wage! o.0 I think there's always an incentive to work harder because the difference between getting $30,000 on welfare compared to working harder and making $50,000 or $70,000 has a huge impact on your quality of living. A basic income guarantee is an interesting idea.
Actually, I did understand the point that you made, but what I pointed out still will not cease to have an effect on peoples incentive to work hard in order to level up.
I actually support introducing a basic income guarantee, but I see great problems in combination with minimum wage laws.
Sweden is a "socialist" country correct? We're often praised for our equality and low poverty rate, low crime rate, socialized medicine etc.
-But we don't have any state enforced minimum wage law.
Consult the hypothetical example I wrote for itzahazylife, I think it aptly sets the question for us to answer. It's more complicated than the way you both are talking about it so far (it's an issue of arithmetic, not a conceptual one).
point at which a minimum wage in this example would hurt the economy more than help it is when it decreases job creation by 25%, which means 1.5 jobs for each business * 100 = 150 jobs * $8/hr = $1,200 in consuming power, equal to having no min. wage. So based on that hypothetical scenario, as long as the minimum wage doesn't decrease job creation by 25%, then in the long-run, more consuming power is created-->more business-->businesses make more jobs in the future for everyone.
which yields $1,200 in consuming power for the economy. If we have a $8/hr min. wage, then, instead of each business making 2 jobs, they make 20% less because of the investment vs. skill discrepancy, so 1.6 jobs each = 160 jobs * $8 = $1,280 in consuming power. So if a min. wage creates 20% fewer jobs because of the higher min. wage req., the higher salaries that would be paid for the jobs that ARE created increases aggregate consuming power, helps the economy more. Statistically, the Cont'd
Yes, I think this repeats the point I made earlier. A min. wage forces a min. payment for a worker more or less regardless of skill if the employer chooses to give them the job. In some cases, the discrepancy between skill and wage vs. wage and investment might be so great that paying them that wage is inefficient relative to using the same money in investing in your business. In such a case, a job is then lost. The question then is, is the likelihood of this discrepancy between skill Cont'd
The combination of welfare and the minimum wage law sets up a hurdle for people who already get paid to do essentially nothing, but would like to start leveling up by getting a low skill job; Because low skill jobs disappear when they're not considered worth the money spent on them.
Just look at Sweden; No minimum wage laws over here
The minimum wage laws don't do any good. There has to be a non forced agreement between union workers and companies or no agreement at all.
We've had a form of corporatist socialism in Sweden for several decades and we don't see any need for a minimum wage law.
"it's not true that there's "no incentive" for people to demand jobs/working opportunities."
A lot of these poor people are living better than they ever have before due to welfare, PLUS they barely have to work. You do have a point when it comes to some people, but, most people are fine getting the things they need while at the same time barely needing to work for it. And the thing is, people aren't just getting what they need, they are getting luxuries also. They even give out free cars lol.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
− three = 2
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Yes, send me email updates and action alerts from RonPaul.com
Notify me of follow-up comments by email.
Notify me of new posts by email.
RonPaul.com is maintained by independent grassroots supporters of Ron Paul. Neither this website nor the articles, posts, videos or photos appearing on it are paid for, approved, endorsed or reviewed by Ron Paul or his staff.