Right you are, Steezo. And the Oz dollar now trades at US$0.85. So that eight-dollar combo is only US$6.80, or 43% more than the Manhattan combo. Fair enough. A forty-three percent price difference instead of "no difference" as advanced by the socialists.

Say, who eats at McDonalds anyway? Is it more likely to be low-wage employees or international corporate lawyers? I don't really care if the cost of the Big Mac combo doubles because US$6.80 is quite literally two minutes' work for me, but gosh, I'd imagine that other wage earners — say, a third-class petty officer in the Navy with a young family — might consider a 43% increase in price somewhat burdensome.

This guy pictured below, though, he doesn't actually care about a higher-priced Big Mac combo. Raising the price of labor beyond its marginal value means that this guy here is likely to hold that job instead of some surly illiterate nagger, and the former McDonalds employee who now doesn't have a job is going to find the Big Mac combo much less affordable on his new US$0.00 hourly wage.

As for whether I'll be raped and torn apart by a pack of niggers, that seems unlikely because I live where there are no such animals and visit the United States only rarely. But you might be, if this kind of socialist thinking is not corrected. I'll be praying for you.



As long as we're full of concern for America's lowest-paid wage earners, CxGxPx, let me ask: Do you support the President's gambit to throw open the borders and import millions more illiterate peasants to compete with America's existing corps of illiterate peasants? I don't. I oppose amnesty and open borders, because of the economic violence done thereby to the most vulnerable Americans. Markets work; if the labor market weren't constantly being replenished with new low-wage workers, wouldn't the wages paid at the bottom rungs of the ladder increase naturally?