Bump
Inputs are based on Yesterday's data (though a weekly or biweekly average would be
more accurate) from
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Click "Yesterday" button
Spreadsheet: https://docs.zoho.com/embed/cs6eab29f117fec84421c9c13fb84913ab066
INPUTS:
Daily New Infection Rate: (1,127/132,999) = .00847 or .847%
Active Cases: 132,999
Days from Infection to Recovery: 30 - Assumption (Entered)
Response lag time is 4 seconds+ when used as an html.
If you download, you have right click, Properties, Unblock, to open.
Inputs are based on Yesterday's data (though a weekly or biweekly average would be
more accurate), from
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Click "Yesterday" button
Spreadsheet: https://docs.zoho.com/embed/cs6eab29f117fec84421c9c13fb84913ab066
INPUTS:
Daily New Infection Rate: (25,069/1,169,419) = .021437 or 2.1437%
Active Cases: 1,169,419
Days from Infection to Recovery: 30 - Assumption (Entered)
Response lag time is 4 seconds+ when used as an html.
If you download, you have right click, Properties, Unblock, to open.
In the future, (according to the spreadsheet in 97 days) if Texas has 2,000,000
Active Cases at 6.5%, and 130,000 New Cases Daily instead of 1,336, its new cases
will make up a larger percentage of the total new cases of the nation as a whole,
raising the Nation's Daily New Infection Rate, above the Assumed Recovery Rate of
3.33%.
(Recovery rate is a blank assumption, 30 days from infection to recovery, (100%/30
= 3.33% daily)).
When looked at for all States, New York was the best, California was about directly in the middle, and Texas was one of the worst. You would have to get a
weekly or biweekly average to be entirely accurate, and that takes 5-10+ minutes
time for every State. We can look at every state by the day, and that takes 1-2
minutes per State. A more expeditious spreadsheet could be developed possibly.
If you put in today's Texas' numbers, the spreadsheet shows, Texas will have 100,000 Active Cases in 37 days, and 6,500 New Cases Daily.
This, and if worse going forward, will obviously change the face of the Nation's
COVID Infection. Whereas 1 month ago, U.S. daily New Cases were 30,000, today
they are 20,000, and according to Nationwide data, at a 2.14% Daily Infection Rate
Increase, the spreadsheet shows 10,000 New Cases Daily, in just 38 days.
If Texas were to go to 100% infected, there would be 1,949,385 Daily New Cases on
the very last day to reach 29 million cases (day 151) at 6.5%.
[[(29,671,004 Active Cases on day 151 [Cell G159 is calculated by adding the previous days 28,234,632 active cases to 1,855,015 New Cases Daily on those active
cases at that rate, and subtracting 418,643, Recovered New Cases from Day 120 [Cell F128], 31 days ago, since the 31st day denotes the situation at the end of
the 30th day. In actuality, some 42,000 people have already recovered already
today in Texas on 5/29/2020, as Total Cases today is some 62,000, to some 20,000
Active, and day 120's 418,643 Cases would also be recovered, as well as every day
before that. To make the numbers work, the model was not developed that extensively, as it didn't seem worth the cost of time. I'm doing this for free. I
just added up all those active cases that would have recovered from day 120 and
before, and it equals 8,626,554. So Texas would never actually have 29,000,000
ACTIVE Cases before its TOTAL Cases reached its terminal value of 29,000,000 Population. Go figure. (You can about confirm this with Row 153, Column D: 29,878,063 Total Cases, vs. Column G: 22,030,868 Active Cases.)]]
Web archive of this data/date: https://web.archive.org/web/20200530040751/https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
you got that right..?
On 6/3/2020 10:11 PM, Intelligent Party wrote:
on May 14th, from a man who tried to focus more on it in January 2020,
while others paid him little heed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NDnc8YY674
"On May 14, 2020 Bright testified before the Health Subcommittee of the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce. In a written statement issued the day before, he
warned that 2020 could be "the darkest winter in modern history" if the country
does not undertake a vigorous response to fight the virus. "Our window of
opportunity is closing. If we fail to develop a national coordinated response,
based in science, I fear the pandemic will get far worse and be prolonged, causing
unprecedented illness and fatalities," he said."
New Cases
Average Per, Total,
Week, Day by Week, Cases For Week
3/1-3/7 13 Per Day, 88 Total for week
3/8-3/14 35 Per Day, 247 Total for week
3/15-3/21 162 Per Day, 1,333 Total for week, Stay-At-Home Order
3/22-3/28 454 Per Day, 3,175 Total for week
3/29-4/4 1,256 Per Day, 8,795 Total for week
4/5-4/11 1,194 Per Day, 8,356 Total for week
4/12-4/18 1,220 Per Day, 8,539 Total for week
4/19-4/25 1,690 Per Day, 11,831 Total for week
4/26-5/2 1,636 Per Day, 11,452 Total for week, Decrease
5/3-5/9 1,866 Per Day, 13,064 Total for week
5/10-5/16 1,737 Per Day, 12,159 Total for week, Decrease
5/17-5/23 1,982 Per Day, 13,871 Total for week
5/24-5/30 2,553 Per Day, 17,873 Total for week
It seems likely this upward trend will sadly and certainly continue!
Total,
13 Weeks 1,215 Per Day, 110,583 Total for 91 Days
Only Last,
9 Weeks 1,682 Per Day, 105,940 Total for 63 Days
Data is from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_California
Look, I did this myself. Professionals would have another person double check it.
If you care, maybe you should, or get an accountant.
Spreadsheet you can use for projections: https://docs.zoho.com/embed/cs6eab29f117fec84421c9c13fb84913ab066
You would want to calculate the Rate of Daily New Infections on Active Cases per
day, for the last week or two, by the day, and average that. Rather than just
dividing the average per the week, by the current Active. My current data sources
are insufficient. Wikipedia doesn't even say how many are active. Worldometer
only has active for California for the current day, no history. I tried https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19/tree/master/csse_covid_19_data for "USA
daily state reports" to construct my own data set, but it doesn't have Recovered
for California as listed. It does for other States. For California it just has
all Total, and Active as minus Deaths. Worldometer on the other hand reports about 20% as Recovered, and only 86,421 of 115,119 as Active with 4,287 deaths. I
emailed them for historical data and source. Suffice to say, there must be no
analysts analyzing COVID, and all their fancy graphs may be for not. It shouldn't
be a big deal to get a simple accounting of the facts. But apparently unintelligence is extreme.
If we do not have a forbearance on all debt and rent, and $1,250 for every man
woman and child for the time of COVID plus one year following to get the economy
moving, I predict catastrophe.
Consider the people with money have little luxury to spend that extra money on,
and will save it, and you can increase taxes at the top in the future. You have
no idea what or who needs at the bottom. Someone with a $3,000 per month mortgage
on top of living expenses, still needs a forbearance or will loose their home.
They can not go to work or they will die. An Economic Pause, and not a Great Depression is in order, and it is wrong for businesses to fail to COVID, when they
truly have economically viable assets. That is not the free market, that is madness.
COVID is not gone, and is not going away without 4-12 months of temperance, but an
economic meltdown is unnecessary and insane. I suggest keeping all "stay-at-home"
advice in place, while removing the legal technicalities, except for violating
other's personal space. Clarify it to be "stay-at-home-from-work."
Those people demonstrating are demonstrating pretty extreme for a cop who's been
charged. The L.A. riots many years ago was because they were acquitted. This
stuff makes no sense, and what are their demands and grievances. Without money
for everybody and a forbearance I wouldn't be surprised with war in the future. I
pray I'm wrong. But people deserve money. Demand, Grievance, Target, Objective
should be the motto of any such interested parties, but people with nothing to
loose and nothing to live for, don't even care if their war effort is doomed to
failure. Those who attack are poor. I suggest a different tactic to save our
United States.
Suffice to say, things are highly insufficient, and we need things improving, if
without threats or acts of violence, by the oppressive, or the lawless, not getting worse.
[Spreadsheet will always reload when you reload html,
Response lag time is 4 seconds+ when used as an html.
If you download, you to have right click, Properties, Unblock, to open.]
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any malintentions with
these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.
It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a matter of
fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of weapons is not wrong. It's
fact. Those who believe democracy authors the law, don't believe in the law at
all, so how can they advocate such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the
law. And why would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?
"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against. "Thug life"
writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their un-civilization, whilst
glorifying it. So the valid grievance would be to persecute gangsters who have
guns, if malintent is what it is. Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you
could persecute gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have malintentions,
possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very upstanding advocates of
liberty, respect and justice, and have all the guns in the world - in their car.
It's like bolt cutters and lock picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught
with them in a "Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters and lock picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with terrorists and gasoline. We
all have gasoline, but terrorists are suspected of malintention, while good people
drive around with extra gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree
with this legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find holistic solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population, share the poverty equally.
Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are committed by
poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely require a crowd. 100% of
the people who commit massacres have no criminal record and got their guns before
mal-activity. Once one commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns,
vehicles, knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap to say it's
okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's a crime to be Jewish. It
truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who enforce such laws are scum. And I
don't agree to give my name to buy a gun.
There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who bear guns
are different than you.
The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better identified, but fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone can throw rocks at anyone's
head.
People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing wrong with being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When to use the gun, against
another person, is the question. Not because they threw popcorn or water on you.
Re: COVID - It's Your Right To Congregation Is Preeminent, And That Involves Assembly, Church, The Capitol Demonstration And Public Property
It's not like you have freedom of Assembly except as prescribed by law.
It's not like the Constitution is just saying your right to freedom of speech and
your right to bear arms are just a good idea.
The Constitution is saying you are right, you are legal, and they are wrong, and
they are illegal, if they prohibit you.
Yes, you have a right Thanksgiving Dinner too.
So you fucking monkeys are just going to commit ridiculous acts, and spread COVID,
and not be on your own recognizances, like people recycle and stand in line without being controlled and coerced to?
Regulation of commerce - employee and consumer protections, has merit, and is the
way to control. This also includes product labeling/marketing/advertising control, quality control, and perhaps product bundling. It doesn't include prohibition when there's not a substitute product.
So do you think you monkeys would be able to only associate only with intimate,
repetitive, friends and relatives, during COVID, and not throw the gala wedding
party even if it wasn't commercially provided.
The stupidest thing would be to be in a room with someone you're not going to talk
to, for non-essential activities.
But isn't all valid work essential!? What are we doing it for otherwise?
Whenever someone speaks to you, they're spewing tiny specks of spit in your face.
Who has to perfect the law? The person with the valid social grievance, or the
person with the valid liberty?
All a police officer has to do, is ask do if someone has any malintentions with
these weapons? If "no," they are 100% legal.
It's just simply not wrong to possess a weapon. It's not wrong as a matter of
fact and scientific unadulterated truth. Possession of weapons is not wrong. It's
fact. Those who believe democracy authors the law, don't believe in the law at
all, so how can they advocate such law? They believe in democracy, but not in the
law. And why would one believe in democracy, or the republic, and not science,
truth, god and man?
"Thug life" is what anti-gunners validly have a grievance against. "Thug life"
writes songs about blowing each other away, echoing their un-civilization, whilst
glorifying it. So the valid grievance would be to persecute gangsters who have
guns, if malintent is what it is. Then, it's not legal to be in a gang, and you
could persecute gangsters period for their malintent, but you could persecute gangsters who have guns all the more. But if people don't have malintentions,
possession of weapons is not illegal. They can be very upstanding advocates of
liberty, respect and justice, and have all the guns in the world - in their car.
It's like bolt cutters and lock picking sets are 100% legal, unless one's caught
with them in a "Catsuit" at 1:00am or there's suspicion of malintention. Gainfully
employed people don't commit petty burglary, and their bolt cutters and lock picking sets are generally not suspicious. Same with terrorists and gasoline. We
all have gasoline, but terrorists are suspected of malintention, while good people
drive around with extra gasoline cans on the back of their Jeeps. So if you agree
with this legal theory of malintention by itself being enough to condemn for crime. Otherwise there's nothing at all, and you'll have to find holistic solutions, - increase the wealth, decrease the population, share the poverty equally.
Massacres have nothing to do with it, are 100% a red herring, are committed by
poor unemployed upset students, and the like, and merely require a crowd. 100% of
the people who commit massacres have no criminal record and got their guns before
mal-activity. Once one commits a massacre, there's not a second offense. Guns,
vehicles, knives will all do the same for massacres. It's crap to say it's okay
to ban guns for massacres, because that's a non-argument. It's crap to say it's
okay to ban guns for no reason, as it's crap to say, it's a crime to be Jewish. It
truly is prejudice and abhorrent. People who enforce such laws are scum. And I
don't agree to give my name to buy a gun.
There is not a right to ban guns for no reason, or because people who bear guns
are different than you.
The rules of self-defense and engagement, need to be better identified, but fearing a big man is what fearing a gun is, and anyone can throw rocks at anyone's
head.
People do keep and bear guns for sport and hobby. There's nothing wrong with being an aficionado, an enthusiast, or a gun lover. When to use the gun, against
another person, is the question. Not because they threw popcorn or water on you.
Selling Contagious Poison, As Food And Recreation, Is My Big Question To America
Consumers are not even warned?
Employees are not even informed the job is to get COVID?
Waiters don't produce equity. After the service is over there is nothing to show
for it.
Rather than "Non-Essential Services," "Commercial Entertainment Services" should
be eliminated.
People TOIL for others entertainment, and amusement? Work is CREATED this way?
We let people take this big risk for entertainment which doesn't create any equity?
At least people in a movie, create a movie we have for 100 years.
"Commercial Entertainment Services:" I am talking about Broadway, Circuses, Vegas
Shows, The Opera, Waiters, and Whores.
If there is a substitute product, such as take-out for dine-in, then total prohibition may be alright. We should endeavor to not create an illegal market,
but whores don't produce anything. Sex and property are the mountain between us.
So the lack of a substitute product seems to go to just whores, and I'm not saying
we should or shouldn't have them, but I don't agree with punishment.
Health Clubs are not even close to the same basket as "Commercial Entertainment
Services."
Then there's haircuts, pedicures, and gardeners. The work they provide doesn't
last for long.
I think I may never hire another waiter in my life. That's not the sort of job I
like to provide. I understand the Restaurant industry is huge. It is also apparently a huge waste. Do you want to finance more kitchens for quality take-out, or more Restaurants? We can only spend so much, and we don't have property at the bottom. Waiters, rather, should be producing equity, or going to
school for free. Waiters could be allowed to spend the same without working, and
it wouldn't do anything at all to the economy, people would just not 'enjoy' waiters.
The governments would pull poisonous lettuce off the shelves, but there would be
other lettuce for sale. They pulled Tryptophan, which killed several people, off
the shelves for ten years, without a substitute product; do you think that was
wrong? COVID is not just poisonous food for sale at Restaurants; COVID is contagious poisonous food for sale at restaurants. The government prohibits poisonous drugs to be sold as recreational party-fun. COVID is not just poison
sold as recreational party-fun; COVID is contagious poison sold as recreational
party-fun.
Selling contagious poison, as food and recreation, is my big question to America.
And taking such a big health risk, for entertainment, which doesn't produce any
equity. But actually my question is why have such "Commercial Entertainment Services" work, allowed in the first place. That's what we want to trade? So the
waiter can go out to eat, if there ever is a post-COVID? It's not going to make
us rich. Instead he could produce, and buy, a nicer dinning room table. Rather
than endless toil.
(And porn-stars, unlike whores, yet like a table producer, and like a movie star,
produce a product. Still, the general principle of employment law, is the work
ought not be unnecessarily dangerous, unnecessarily unsanitary, unnecessarily injurious, nor unnecessarily painful. So, as to professional sports, they only
sort of produce a product. I doubt they'll start playing flag football in place
of NFL, or get rid of boxing anytime soon, but the purpose of Ultimate Fighting
was supposedly to figure out which martial art works best; and have they figured
that out?, and do we really need Ultimate Fighting? They can keep the bull-fighting in Mexico, or else we'll have dog fighting and cock fighting and
other such stuff soon here. (Animal cruelty, is not a legal persuasion.) And yet
these Sports barely produce a product, too; like you watch reruns of the NFL or
Olympics much. If you want to play High School for free, or intramural, that's
another matter. But the two issues are: employed to commit self-harm; and, working for other's amusement producing no equity.)
Making salaries more equitable, could be another way to address the matter. Based
on the above, you couldn't ever have a servant for a Birthday party, nor a Wedding. Yet still, do you need one? But having to pay more equitably, that is
every person more equal consumption, for an hour worked; could mean not frivolously employing a waiter, vs. not paying an NFL star to risk his life. While
we all need to hold equity and savings, we could all consume the same, but some
person owns the Empire State Building.
But even with slave labor, Waiters don't build the economy, and a lot of what is
going on right now *is* about building the economy. At least slaves would build
real equity. Waiters will not. So while one way of solving the problem could be
paying more equal consumption per hour worked, thus we would not frivolously employ, nor compel risk taking, for pay, nor high pay, we do need, at the same
time, to hold capital savings in private hands.
All the above said; working to commit the self harm of risking COVID, and building
no equity, while doing so, both at the same time, is really the big issue here.
There's no argument in my mind that it's ludicrous. Even so, people need jobs,
but it would be/should be, COVID that put them out of a job, but I guess people
merely take risks for money, which is serious, when they have no other option.
It's more the fruits of our Capital, that produces, than our labor. Maybe ex-waiters, and the like, should just have free cash to spend, to a degree. With
still more incentive than that, to earn, as we need to finance Capital and Intellectual Capital - School, to make the Country yet wealthier.... Perhaps money
if you're trying to get to School, or are going to school. The Macro-Economy is
at stake here.
A movie theater can be run by a few people, serving hundreds. And let's not confuse Commercial Entertainment *Services*, with Commercial Entertainment *Capital*. We do want Big Screen T.V.'s right? For if we went to prohibiting
Capital, it could be anything... from Children's Toys to Christmas Trees. Anything
that you enjoy. Still, jewelry made out of Gold is a colossal waste. People die
mining Gold all day. Costume jewelry may be a sufficient substitute product. (In
Russia, the waste of the likes of the Faberge Eggs - extremely expensive art -
contributed the Russian civil war, and over half a century of Marxist Communism,
which caused the Cold War.)
Selling contagious poison, as food and recreation, while building no equity, is
yet my big question to America. The more we study and think about this issue the
richer we may become. COVID is a new and fairly unstudied topic. As the more you
analyze, the more you know how to allocate, and the richer you become. What do
logic, reason, and intelligence ultimately and further dictate? To know, we have
to think. This is a question so far, if it's not clear.
"Those who remember always that they know nothing, and who have become willing to
learn everything, will learn it.
...Think not you understand anything until you pass the test of perfect peace" - A
Course in Miracles
"My fellow Americans, you're owed nothing less than the truth." - President Joe
Biden, - March 11, 2021
How is there non-essential work being done, ever. While "work from home if you
can" is a great law, and taking all consumer and employee precautions, and protection, is imperative; isn't all work essential?
Rather than "Non-Essential Services," "Commercial Entertainment Services" and perhaps "Commercial Entertainment Real Estate," should be eliminated.
If the movie theater were a "public" structure, that could be reserved to show
your rented movie to hundreds, at least we would be able to use the structure over
and over, vs. building a movie theater or a football stadium instead of housing.
Yet the people providing the "non-essential entertainment service" produce no equity whatsoever, and after the waiter's work is done, he goes home having produced NOTHING. No dinning room table to last years. A mere food store in the
movie theater is notwithstanding.
So "Public" Entertainment Real Estate," is that still bad? So, do we want "Entertainment Real Estate" at all?
1. Real Property, 2. Personal Property, 3. Consumption.
Service is a Consumption, unless it produces Personal Property (or Real Property).
Consumption is all gone once the work's done. A gardener's work lasts a couple
weeks. I guess you have memories of a waiter's service.
Plus, is it really anyone's passion to be a waiter? How about a masseuse, or a
whore, or are those even more important than haircuts as healthcare, but do people
want to do it, how about to be in a show, on Broadway or in a play? It's their
passion? You think it's not work? People should wake up happy every day to work.
Are these people happy? Don't we want to eliminate _work_? Life is about art,
and science, and friends.
Should _art_ be all hobby? You can cook for your friends. Not be enslaved for
other's entertainment and amusement.
"The foundation of empire is art and science. Remove them or degrade them, and
the empire is no more.
Empire follows art and not vice versa as Englishmen suppose." - William Blake
"Sex and art are the same thing." - Pablo Picasso
Left Brain/Right Brain = Science/Art
"The intuitive mind is a sacred gift, and the rational mind is a faithful servant.
We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift."
- Albert Einstein
"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,"—that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to
know." - John Keats
... if you have industry and science and you're rich!
Yet,
"Love is your power, which... gives you everything."
- Jesus Christ, A Course in Miracles, Chapter 7, Section 6
DIRECT BIDEN TO MAKE THE MINIMUM WAGE *MEDIAN* $15 NATIONWIDE (In 2009 Chained
Dollars)
This coincides with Trump's notion of 65% per capita GDP, of each of the 3,000
counties.
This will be 50% of the per capita GDP, AFTER TAXES, of each of the 3,000 Counties.
Or else, better yet; determine the real 50% per Capita GDP, AFTER TAXES, of each
of the 3,000 Counties (including state and local taxes).
Raise by 5% of the County’s per capita GDP every three months, or $1 every three
months, whichever is higher.
United States per capita GDP varies,
from $31,881 in Mississippi, to $65,545 in Massachusetts (In 2009 Chained Dollars):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP_per_capita
[The U.S. Department of Commerce uses 2009 as a base year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chained_dollars]
Miss. at $31,881 * 65% = $20,722.65, /2080hours = $9.96/hr under this notion. Mass. at $65,545 * 65% = $42,604.25, /2080hours = $20.48/hr under this notion.
Between the 3,000 Counties, the per capita GDP disparity, is even greater, than
between the States.
Underemployment masks true unemployment.
Take 1-2 years to raise, so as not to shock. (COVID just shocked, and they didn't
give a sh*t at all).
So, every 3 months, raise the minimum wage 5% of the County's per capita GDP, or
$1, whichever is higher, until it reaches 65% of the County's per capita GDP, or
$65% of the lowest State's GDP, whichever is higher. Or determine the 50% thing.
Trump and Hilary discussed raising the minimum wage, in debate in 2016, Trump was
thinking of 65% of per capita GDP of the County, while Hilary said $12 per hour.
Trump and Biden just discussed it in debate Oct 22, 2020. While Biden says he
supports a $15 Federal Minimum Wage, Trump says $15 would be ruinous in some Counties. Trump should have gone with the prior notion of 65% per capita GDP of
the County:
Trump and Biden in Debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axBYd5X1vEY
Trump saying at least $10 Nationwide, in 2016, he never passed this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJoFHS44rII
$15/hr would be too high in Mississippi, and too low in Massachusetts.
$15/hr * 2080hours = $31,200, which would be 97.86% of per capita GDP in Mississippi, and 47.60% of per capita GDP in Massachusetts (in 2009 chained dollars). Yet we want 65% per capita GDP everywhere. And to make it higher, you
would have to limit spending at the top (which is a separate idea). We have to
protect capital savings.
Twenty-one States, have a State or Federal, minimum wage of $7.25/hr = $15,080/yr.
Five of those States, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Tennessee, have no State minimum wage, yet only the Federal of $7.25/hr = $15,080/yr.
Sixteen of those States, have a State Minimum wage equal to the Federal of $7.25/hr = $15,080/yr: Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia,
North Carolina, and Georgia.
The Federal Minimum Wage of $15,080, is 47.3% of per capita GDP in Mississippi,
and 23% of per capita GDP in Massachusetts (in 2009 chained dollars). Yet we want
65% per capita GDP everywhere. And to make it higher, you would have to limit
spending at the top (which is a separate idea). We have to protect capital savings.
It's like if you were trying to make the minimum wage in Mexico, the same as in
the United States; it wouldn't fly.
Mexico's Per Capita GDP is $10,405, (Mexico's GDP _PPP_ is $21,362). (Likewise Mississippi's GDP _PPP_ may be higher than $31,881).
We have to protect capital savings. But we can't build an economy by not having
an economy. There will never be an economy for the slaves, if they don't build
one through spending anything, relative to the existent capital. We will never
allocate resources correctly, and build the economy where we need to, if we don't
start at the bottom. We need to build the economy from the ground up.
I envision a much brighter future, for America, if we raise the minimum wage, as I
indicate. Look into the future, and see what you see. I'm an economist. Trust me.
Also, a low minimum wage is apparently correlated with a higher State prison population:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_incarceration_and_correctional_supervision_rate
The punishment for crime in most of the fifty U.S. States, is either slavery, or a
dungeon, and that is abomination.
*NOTE, these numbers are actually not adjusted for inflation. There is 2.5% inflation per year; 25% inflation per decade. They have been discussing raising
the minimum wage for some time. Based on inflation, it would be as if Biden were
saying 'make the minimum wage $19.50 nationwide,' and $13 per hour in Mississippi,
and $26 per hour in Massachusetts. Inflation is exponential.
The $13 is Hilary's $12 now, (Donald's $10(?)) with the inflation. Hilary's already inflated 20% from the $9.96 listed at the beginning of this post. That's
how it would be $13, if for the whole nation. The bare minimum; but not high enough, except in Mississippi.
If you go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_GDP_per_capita
and compare Mississippi 2009 chained GDP to (scroll down) 2019 Mississippi GDP,
you have $40,464/$31,881 = 1.269 = 27% increase over 2009. United States total =
$65,281/$50,577 = 1.29 = 29% increase over 2009. Massachusetts $86,942/$65,545 =
1.32 = 32% increase over 2009. [So those previously calculated minimum wage percentages are even lower].
So I conclude, that the answer is:
Every 3 months, raise the minimum wage 5% of the County's per capita GDP, or $1,
whichever is higher, until it reaches 65% of the County's per capita GDP, or $65%
of the lowest State's GDP, whichever is higher. Not to be higher than 65% of the
highest State's GDP, and not to be affected by new States admitted to the Union,
except as determined by Congress (New States will use States already previously
part of the Union, unless otherwise determined by Congress, and States can have
higher minimum wages themselves).
(So if your County's per capita GDP, is lower than the per capita GDP of the State
of Mississippi, you use Mississippi's per capita GDP.)
(The State Government can still make the State minimum wage higher, if it wants).
Keep in mind there will be no money for retards under this plan. The jobs that
they ever could have worked will be eliminated. However, I do not envision an
increase in unemployment. Rather, I believe raising the minimum wage will significantly stimulate the economy. I envision a much more robust economic future for the United States.
Also, if the per capita GDP of Washington D.C. is really $200,000 as Wikipedia
indicates, then this is why we also use just 65% of the highest State's GDP whichever is _lower_, for both Washington D.C. and any Counties who's GDP's are
higher than the highest State's GDP. At the moment New York State, $90,043 = $58,527 /2080= $28/hr would be the highest minimum wage in the Country, for Counties both in and out of New York State, who's 65% per capita GDP is as high or
higher than $28/hr. Rather than indicating a $130,000, $62.50 minimum wage in Washington D.C.
Also, a useful link may be: Wikipedia "List of United States Counties by per capita income" This is not per capita GDP, but per capita income. I presume they're using debt or asset spending to make per capita GDP higher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_counties_by_per_capita_income
[Data for the 50 states and the District of Columbia is from the 2009–2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates:
Data on the District of Columbia does not seem accurate or correlated in this page: $45,290.]
As for the 5% or $1 raise every three months; Start with the State’s minimum wage
if it is higher than the Federal of $7.25.
Finally, TRANSFER FREE CASH of 50% of the after tax minimum wage on a monthly basis. This is 25% per capita GDP; to everyone over 18 years of age. The net of
the free cash plus earnings, cannot be higher than the full time minimum wage. The
amount of free cash shall be reduced until recipient's earnings and free receipts
amount to full time minimum wage, of 50% per capita GDP after taxes.
Part time jobs are the only mal-point there, but workers don't really have control
over hours worked, and so it's not really a point.
TRANSFER FREE CASH of 25% of the after tax minimum wage on a monthly basis. This
is 12.5% per capita GDP; to everyone under 18. The net of the free cash plus earnings cannot be higher than the full time minimum wage. The amount of free
cash shall be reduced until recipient's earnings and free receipts amount to full
time minimum wage, of 50% per capita GDP after taxes.
So far, under this plan, there is no different minimum wage for people under 18.
If there were, that would either get them less pay, or jobs easier, or some of both.
You can get 3 months forward and 3 months back, each, maybe; 6 months upfront if
needed. Amount is determined by residence declared in the highest County be Per
Capita GDP, so people have more money if they move, to a more expensive part of
the Country.
The point is not to spend nor to save, but to spend exactly the right amount, and
on the right things (and to save exactly the right amount). Building the bottom in
consumer products requires spending money. 1. Consumption, 2. Personal Property,
3. Real Property. Otherwise we will never build the Supermarkets and Stores which
provide these products and what people want. It's all a question of what to finance. Due to COVID more spending at Amazon.com has built Amazon.com more, and
will allow Amazon.com to reduce prices. Building these companies is in the interests of the American people, as these companies can then have economies of
scale like Walmart. Average costs are reduced when quantities increase, and fixed
costs stay the same. But the free market must determine which companies to build.
Fiscal Spending can merely increase inflation and the interest rates, and these
will only go up if we reach maximum output. We need to stimulate the economy to
make up for the lost businesses to COVID. But we can only finance so much ultimately, and what is it that we want to finance? Even so, the economy hasn't
been at maximum output since 2000*. Also, waiters don't produce anything, and
would be better off building and buying dinning room tables rather than working
as, and buying, waiters.
Other things we can spend on/finance include:
Transportation
Education
Housing
Water
Power
Needs are (in no particular order):
1. Energy, 2.Communication, 3.Food, 4.Housing, 5.Transportation, 6.Medical & Dental, 7.Education, 8.Sanitation
1.Real Property, 2.Personal Property, 3.Consumption
Not sufficiently developed nor therefore commoditized:
1. Mattresses, 2. Shoes(athletic, boots, supportive dress), 3. Housing, 4. Vehicles 5. Electricity.
And of NEGLIGIBLE cost, YET MANDATORY!:
Free Abortions - in the first trimester /14 weeks; there is no ghost in the fetus,
and with no parental consent - this is mandatory.
Free Sanitation - Dumpsters and Porta Potties for the homeless - this is mandatory.
San Diego has free trash pickup for a large percentage of its residents. Maybe
ALL dumpster services should be paid for by the Government. Otherwise it's the
difficulty of charging homeowners for dumpsters while those living in vehicles can
still have free access to dumpsters. Porta Potties are not an issue in this way.
"Since 1986, the city has collected trash from single-family homes but not apartments, condos, private streets or gated communities. Residents of multi-family units and their landlords have to contract with private companies to
handle their trash." https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/government/the-san-diego-garbage-law-thats-fueled-a-century-of-trash-talk/
One's right to park a bus in a residential neighborhood, and live in it nationwide; if there is no notice not to park in front of, nor directly across
from, someone's house, as view could be blocked, nor block business signs. A bus
or RV is a wall of car. A vehicle with a kitchen, bathroom, and bed, is the minimum acceptable housing. But a shelter is a row of beds for no more than three
nights, and tent is miserable, but provides more privacy than a shelter. Some
tent dwellers have cars a few blocks away.
Everyone produces 1/2 bag of trash per day, whether they live in a vehicle, a tent, or a home.
Stop cities from betraying the public trust by having preferential parking where
it is not needed - as they may rush to use this method to ban RV's.
(*rates were up from 2005-2007 tho) https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate https://www.jpmorganchase.com/about/our-business/historical-prime-rate
and second two years, at a four year public university, free!
And federal funds rate for student loans past that.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 462 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 110:49:37 |
| Calls: | 9,375 |
| Files: | 13,555 |
| Messages: | 6,091,621 |