You high minimum wage assumes the bottom of the labor market is static.

You gave a handful of people a raise; the ones that were apparently underpaid before; but took away the $10 and $12 and $14 jobs from all the rest.

Let's see how it works out for Seattle. They have advantages most other cities don't, but at least it's somewhat of a test case.

Anyone who reasonably calls themselves a programmer.

Within reasonable (cannabis, alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, peyote) limits I don't view it as the job of the Government to regulate pleasure inducing substances. If you want to talk about the extremes (heroin and other opiates, cocaine, barbiturates), then yes, I think the use thereof should be regulated.

Sounds like someone has never had sex or a reasonably tough workout. :P

You mention the anti-tax crowd in passing, as if it is a given, but I don't think so.

I'm here in FL, and you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a New Yorker. And they all have exactly the same story: High taxes ran them off. You can't afford to live there. *If* you had one of those jobs (and GE is one you left off that has quit most of their NY operations), then you could get by. But you really weren't getting rich even working in those places.

Not just taxes. Fuel oil runs you hundreds a month and electricity is even higher. Taxes and fees to own a car. Endless list apparently.

And they don't like Florida better, except maybe the winters. They would be still there if they could, with or without Kodak.

Aspirin isn't a sliver bullet either....

My preference is ibuprofen for head or muscle aches, followed by naproxen, and then aspirin. I'd concur with you about the liver impact of acetaminophen, I had my MD tell me once upon a time that I needed to cut back on the drinking, because of my liver results; I hadn't had a drink in over a month but had been on a regime of acetaminophen + codine following wisdom tooth surgery. That was a wake up call. :)

The best anti-depressant I have found is distance running. The second best is other forms of cardio exercise. SSRIs or SNRIs? Been there, done that, they did very little to help me with depression. I don't even think they took the edge off, although it's hard to prove that negative. Tried Celexa, Zoloft, Effexor, Prozac, and a few other ones. Not only did they fail to address (or even make manageable) the depression, they all came with a lovely side effect and then six months of the other extreme when I discontinued them.

You said social programs, but then you bring up Ford.

That's sort of the opposite.

You strike me as a prime example of a really smart person (your economics are great, and I am your humble student), who couldn't be more wrong in their politics. People like you fascinate me.

So in your world there's no way to feel good besides using drugs or mass consumption?

Are you kidding? You need to read The Idea Factory and get a clearer view of the issue. You're getting outraged over something you don't even understand.

Though come to think of it, most of the time people get outraged it's over things they don't understand.

"Wage earners can't do that."

They don't have to. All those regulations only apply to those with 50 employees or more. Not always 50, but never (well, usually) a one-man business, or a wage earner for sure.

And you propose that only the rich, that can afford a tax lawyer/accountant, should have access to the law of the land, and thus to profits?

And the rest of us masses should have no access to the law, or profit, because we can't afford it?

That is what you just said.

And don't forget that what debt reduction was in there, was due to Newt, and in spite of Clinton.

Newt burned his career over that shutdown, and Clinton came out smelling like a rose, as usual. Clinton's budget. Hell, I guess he signed it.

It should go in the history books as the most costly political victory ever.

Actually, the ads didn't run in New York. So while some tiny spending for production did happen in NY, most of that money was spent on airtime down here in FL and everywhere but NY.

So no, that money was not just turned over in the state. It is gone.

Mr. Kennedy is not a credible source. You know that, right?

Not accusing him of lying outright; he's a politician; I'm sure there is some logic to that claim for a program that we've all been watching ads on close to two years now.

Another thing though that no one else is bringing up; how much tax revenue have they given up for 10 years? What's that number that gets added to the $53M spent so far?