In Seattle, employment is UP since they imposed the new wages......and employers are finding that the employees are more loyal to them.......

I don't even understand why we're having this discussion on the minimum wage. It's too low. Period.

 

The debate should be whether it's going to be raised to $10/hour or $15/hour, not whether it should be raised at all (I'd probably settle in somewhere around the $11/hour mark myself). Then fix the ****ing wage to cost of living and never think about it again.

 

If a normal person is working minimum wage and qualifies for government assistance, that's corporate self-subsidization and it needs to stop. It's that bloody simple.

 

Hell, even my 75 year old conservative, curmudgeonly father thinks the minimum wage should be raised for the simple fact "when I worked minimum wage, I was paid nearly twice as much in real dollars".

Raising the minimum wage will lead to a reduction in jobs and hours worked, that is a fact. It may lead to other negative things too.

 

On the positive side, perhaps the overall wage gain will offset the loss of jobs and hours. I'm open minded to hearing about where that breakeven point is, and where it can be expected to be in 10-20 years time.

 

Raising the minimum wage will lead to a reduction in jobs and hours worked, that is a fact. It may lead to other negative things too.

 

On the positive side, perhaps the overall wage gain will offset the loss of jobs and hours. I'm open minded to hearing about where that breakeven point is, and where it can be expected to be in 10-20 years time.

 

Where do you get that fact? It hasn't borne out in Seattle that way. Also, Costco pays more than Walmart, and they seem to make more money......

 

I don't know the answers to your question, frankly. But, to pretend we KNOW that a higher minimum wage will reduce jobs and hours worked is presumptive at best.

 

Where do you get that fact? It hasn't borne out in Seattle that way. Also, Costco pays more than Walmart, and they seem to make more money......

 

I don't know the answers to your question, frankly. But, to pretend we KNOW that a higher minimum wage will reduce jobs and hours worked is presumptive at best.

As opposed to throwing solutions at the wall and seeing what sticks? I think the break-even question I'm asking is very fair. More than fair even, since I'm not even asking you account for social costs of putting *more* people out of work. Which is what would happen in minimum wage sectors (ie. the restaurant biz). I understand that's happened in Seattle actually.

 

As opposed to throwing solutions at the wall and seeing what sticks? I think the break-even question I'm asking is very fair. More than fair even, since I'm not even asking you account for social costs of putting *more* people out of work. Which is what would happen in minimum wage sectors (ie. the restaurant biz). I understand that's happened in Seattle actually.

 

No, it hasn't. It did month 1, but since then, it has turned around. You might want to read up on the last few months there.

 

And, on a chat site, where I have given it little thought? I'm not going to make up a number here. that would require serious work on numbers I don't have access to (or time for). 

As opposed to throwing solutions at the wall and seeing what sticks?.

That's kind of how the scientific method works.

 

"As the late Richard Feynman, one of the leading theoretical physicists of the twentieth century, wrote:

 

The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific ‘truth’.

(Feynman, Leighton and Sands 1963, p. 1-1)"

 

As opposed to throwing solutions at the wall and seeing what sticks? 

 

Isn't that the argument states' righters make? We should have 50 states experimenting to see what works? As opposed to Central government types that believe we find the best answer, and impose it. Frankly, I like some combination of this (like, I hate pollution laws not being federal, since it crosses state lines).

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by Mike Sixel

 

But Pseudo has a point. While we can't tax the rich into oblivion - nor should we - we can't let them dictate policy out of fear they'll take their ball and go... Where, exactly? Most of the western world has higher tax rates than the US. It's not as if these people are going to flee to Kazakhstan.

 

Well, in some other places you can off-set tax increases with a reduction in other costs.  I think this issue - taxing the wealthy and corporate taxes - are one where both sides go too far.  We should be looking for a better balance.

 

And while I agree that policy can be akin to scientific exploration, science also has a number of important controls in place that help things moving forward.  Policy, on the other hand, has supporters that won't let go of it no matter how much it fails.  (Or critics that won't stop attacking it no matter how it succeeds)

 

I believe in the model of letting states try things exactly like this, but it requires people to be able to examine the sucesses and failures objectively.  And therein lies the problem with experimentation and politics.

 

No, it hasn't. It did month 1, but since then, it has turned around. You might want to read up on the last few months there.

 

And, on a chat site, where I have given it little thought? I'm not going to make up a number here. that would require serious work on numbers I don't have access to (or time for). 

You are really cherry picking. I don't know what's going on in Seattle, but there is at least one Forbes article suggesting Seattle's restaurant employment is growing less than the rest of the state's. Who knows, there other factors than min. wage, obviously. To suggest that controlling the price of anything, labor included, leads to a more sufficient outcome than the market, well the burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise, and I don't think you've proved anything with this Seattle example.

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by Willihammer

That article admits:

 

1. the data is for the MSA, not just Seattle....

2. It is published annually, and includes a lot of time that isn't a reflection of what has changed or not

3. They have not talked to restaurant owners to see what is, is not happening.

 

but, I had not seen that one. It is a rebuttal of the article I was going to post. Bottom line, we don't know yet. Also, if you raise the minimum wage EVERYWHERE.....then I can't see how we end up with less restaurants overall. But, I could be wrong. That said, to your point, there is some break even point (even in efficiency, let alone happiness) were we can lose some jobs, but some number of people are MUCH better off. I don't know what that is anymore than I did an hour ago....

Not directly related, but some food for thought: Goldman Sachs Says It May Be Forced to Fundamentally Question How Capitalism Is Working I also found the reddit comments interesting. 

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by PseudoSABR

Not directly related, but some food for thought: Goldman Sachs Says It May Be Forced to Fundamentally Question How Capitalism Is Working I also found the reddit comments interesting.

 

I think the first URL is incomplete.

 

That article admits:

 

1. the data is for the MSA, not just Seattle....

2. It is published annually, and includes a lot of time that isn't a reflection of what has changed or not

3. They have not talked to restaurant owners to see what is, is not happening.

 

but, I had not seen that one. It is a rebuttal of the article I was going to post. Bottom line, we don't know yet. Also, if you raise the minimum wage EVERYWHERE.....then I can't see how we end up with less restaurants overall. But, I could be wrong. That said, to your point, there is some break even point (even in efficiency, let alone happiness) were we can lose some jobs, but some number of people are MUCH better off. I don't know what that is anymore than I did an hour ago....

We do know. We know the relationship between price and demand is inverse, not direct. We know labor is not exempt from this. This is fact. That's half the reason we have an outsourcing problem in the first place. Look at Europe's unemployment. The question of unemployment and min. wage is settled. The only thing up for debate as far as I'm concerned is the possiblity that despite the increased unemployment, places like the United States and Europe have achieved a more desirable outcomes. I'm skeptical but willing to listen on that. I mean, obviously the situation here is still better than China, but is Europe better still? Again I'm skeptical.

Edited February 3, 201610 yr by Willihammer

 

We do know. We know the relationship between price and demand is inverse, not direct. We know labor is not exempt from this. This is fact. That's half the reason we have an outsourcing problem in the first place. Look at Europe's unemployment. The question of unemployment and min. wage is settled. The only thing up for debate as far as I'm concerned is the possiblity that despite the increased unemployment, places like the United States and Europe have achieved a more desirable outcomes. I'm skeptical but willing to listen on that. I mean, obviously the situation here is still better than China, but is Europe better still? Again I'm skeptical.

 

we don't know that. People buy lots of things that are more expensive, because they perceive the higher price indicates it has more value, for example (wine being a great example). People are not rational robots.

 

All I know is that most Europeans live longer, healthier, and happier lives (self reported on the latter, in surveys) than we do. Something must contribute to that......I think universal HC is one of those (that's almost not disputable at this point, if you look at population data). I don't know if higher floors on wages is one of those or not.

We are not talking about wine, we are talking about labor. Employment has an inverse relationship with price floors, its not exceptional in this regard like wine is.

 

I think the first URL is incomplete.

Thanks should be working now.

 

We are not talking about wine, we are talking about labor. Employment has an inverse relationship with price floors, its not exceptional in this regard like wine is.

 

Fair, but I think absolutes are not good......plenty of companies are finding that paying more is good for their business, and does not lead to less employees for them. 

Higher minimum wages also means more money in the economy which should translate to demand for more goods and services which should translate to more jobs.  Those businesses that don't survive will eventually be replaced with a more efficient business or a owner satisfied with less profits if the good/service they provide is in demand.   

 

Fair, but I think absolutes are not good......plenty of companies are finding that paying more is good for their business, and does not lead to less employees for them. 

We are talking federal policy. Thousands of companies will be impacted. Small businesses that don't have vertical integration like Costco or Wal-Mart will be hurt most. That's the irony of it all really.

 

Yeah, people who don't like Cruz tend to be socialists and lobbyists,

What reality are you living in where you think this is the case? A large number of congressman in his own party dislike Cruz and hate working with him. Plenty of conservatives overall dislike him, as well as independents and "non socialist" democrats.

I know politics bring out a lot of opinions, which is fine, but let's cool it on the over generalizations across the board, that accomplishes nothing.

 

I don't even understand why we're having this discussion on the minimum wage. It's too low. Period.

 

The debate should be whether it's going to be raised to $10/hour or $15/hour, not whether it should be raised at all (I'd probably settle in somewhere around the $11/hour mark myself). Then fix the ****ing wage to cost of living and never think about it again.

 

If a normal person is working minimum wage and qualifies for government assistance, that's corporate self-subsidization and it needs to stop. It's that bloody simple.

 

Hell, even my 75 year old conservative, curmudgeonly father thinks the minimum wage should be raised for the simple fact "when I worked minimum wage, I was paid nearly twice as much in real dollars".

Agreed. $15 works for places like LA, Seattle, NYC, Chicago, but probably wont work in Duluth, however I think there should be a national minimum wage somewhere around $10-11an hour, from there it's up to the states/cities to decide if they want to increase at all.

 

so, we don't need laws outlawing gay marriage? Great, we agree on that. How about laws making it illegal for school children to get counseling if they feel suicidal because they are gay in a gay hating state? How about those laws? What about laws restricting what a doctor can/cannot say to a patient, how do you feel about those laws?

 

 

 

I have no objection to any of that so long as you don't tell the church or even the cake maker what they have to do.  Less laws not different laws.

 

I don't even understand why we're having this discussion on the minimum wage. It's too low. Period.

 

The debate should be whether it's going to be raised to $10/hour or $15/hour, not whether it should be raised at all (I'd probably settle in somewhere around the $11/hour mark myself). Then fix the ****ing wage to cost of living and never think about it again.

 

If a normal person is working minimum wage and qualifies for government assistance, that's corporate self-subsidization and it needs to stop. It's that bloody simple.

 

Hell, even my 75 year old conservative, curmudgeonly father thinks the minimum wage should be raised for the simple fact "when I worked minimum wage, I was paid nearly twice as much in real dollars".

 

Do we ban volunteering?  Do we send some cash to owners of failed businesses?  I just see nothing being accomplished by having a minimum wage.  What about the college graduate who has settled into a job paying $75,000 who doesn't realize they could easily make $150,000 what should we do to prop that guy up?  If your worth $15 an hour ask for it.  You'll get it.  If your not worth $15 an hour you'll be the first one out of a job when the minimum legally acceptable contract has no possibility of including you.  As long as the wages at low level jobs is going up why should we even worry about it.  38 year olds who still work at McDonalds should be encouraged to try to do better, and then we should accept that they like the deal they have.

 

Do we ban volunteering?  Do we send some cash to owners of failed businesses?  I just see nothing being accomplished by having a minimum wage.  What about the college graduate who has settled into a job paying $75,000 who doesn't realize they could easily make $150,000 what should we do to prop that guy up? 

What the hell are you talking about?

 

Where do you get that fact? It hasn't borne out in Seattle that way. Also, Costco pays more than Walmart, and they seem to make more money......

 

I don't know the answers to your question, frankly. But, to pretend we KNOW that a higher minimum wage will reduce jobs and hours worked is presumptive at best.

 

You can't measure job numbers at point A and Job numbers at point B and make any conclusion on any single factor.  That would be like crediting an $8 minimum wage elsewhere for similar job growth.  There is no question a law making otherwise agreeable wages illegal will cost jobs. 

 

What the hell are you talking about?

 

I asked two questions care to answer them or would you rather throw out insults?  If you want a minimum wage you better be willing to prop up failed business owners.  Work is work.

Rand Paul and Rick Santorum dropping out... I have great respect for Paul's campaign, but Santorum never got off the ground.

Santorum is proof of how irrelevant Iowa is.  The primary process can really start now.

Santorum is proof of how irrelevant Iowa is. The primary process can really start now.

i don't think it'll really start until NH is out of the way as well. NH isn't as silly and irrelevant as Iowa but it's still a bit wacky.

I asked two questions care to answer them or would you rather throw out insults? If you want a minimum wage you better be willing to prop up failed business owners. Work is work.

bankruptcy laws exist for businesses.....

 

If you raise the minimum wage to $10, and you are a business owner and you can't make it work, then you should go out of business.

Edited February 4, 201610 yr by DaveW