Comments: Scandals

Apparently that 50% figure on minimum wage workers isn't right anyway. Rush Limbaugh made this statement recently, so Al Franken debunks it regularly, using gov't figures. I think he said that over 60% are adults.

Posted by Avedon at March 15, 2005 01:34 PM

You don't owe us anything. We gratefully accept the gifts you offer.

Posted by Jonathan Dresner at March 15, 2005 02:31 PM

Me, I'd invest in the euro. :)

Posted by Elayne Riggs at March 16, 2005 06:52 AM

Avedon - I should have known.

Jonathan - That's very gratifying. :) But in the back of my mind, I can still hear my mother's voice, scolding me bad manners....

Elayne - The Euro! Why didn't I think of that?

Seriously...I'm old enough that I'm looking at my 401k investments and realizing that the mantra of, "the stock market is a long-term investment so don't get tense over short-term missteps" will, before long, no longer apply.

While I don't "blame" the Bush Administration for the "stock market bubble" I most certainly do blame them for taking every counterintuitive step they could think of, and repeating every tactic that's failed in the past, under the guise of "jump-starting the economy."

Now I read we may hit another recession next year, and I'm getting tense. As someone who works for a small company, I'm acutely aware of how small the margin is between "can" and "can't" when it comes to affording employees. (I'm not exactly minimum-wage, either.)

Posted by Anne at March 16, 2005 09:48 AM

Congress should be ashamed that both parties had proposals to increase the minimum wage and neither side could play nice enough to find a compromise. They should index the minimum wage and be done with it - that might give them the incentive to fix the problems with the indices they have...or link it to their wage growth.

With the Bush Administration & assorted neocon helpers desperately trying to bankrupt the USofA government, bonds don't look like a good bet. If they do manage to phase out all of government but the DoD, the Dept of Commerce, and the federal judiciary, I sure as heck won't invest in bonds. Too much of my money already goes for bombs and bullets. If that's where most of the government's money is going to go, they're not getting mine to play with.

Of course, bond prices are a reflection of interest rates and risk (inflation, ability to pay), not of what the money goes to buy (oh, I'm sure someone would take me to task about the link between the what the money goes for and ability to pay, but with the US government, the risk premium on ability to pay is zero - that's why it's a benchmark). And interest rates, mainly short-term, are heavily influenced by the Federal Reserve which isn't quite the dominion of the neo-cons. Of course, bonds are a BAD bet in the short run- interest rate hikes and inflation are more likely than decreases and deflation which means (short-term) bond prices will probably fall and the Fed had better worry about inverting the yield curve.

Oh..and very little of the spending goes to bombs and bullets..and even if you mean the entire DoD (of course, we'll take out that spending on such things as breast cancer research they put in DoD funding), it's still less than the non-discretionary entitlements.

Finally, I find it irritating this notion of the recent stock market performance as "evidence" against individual accounts. Anybody who is fully invested in equities and within 5 (or even greater) years of retirement is violating basic investment guidelines. Most folks adjust their risk through mutual fund allocation, moving to a balanced asset mix and then heavily toward fixed income assets. Hmm..and the same guy talking about this depression also predicts the Dow at 36,000 in four years - guess the President won't have to worry about his legacy if that happens...

Posted by Col Steve at March 24, 2005 12:25 AM