Left or Right, which way do you lean ?

Halifax2TheMax

mace1229 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary.
I think it was the CEO of Burger King who said if it goes to $15, he'll be firing half the employees and installing automated ordering systems because the cost will be too high. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Yes, which puts more people in higher rates of consumption, which is what drives an economy.  
It's beyond common sense, and yet conservatives can't wrap their minds around the fact that more people spending more money is better for the economy than less people having more money.

So if you double everyone's pay, that solves poverty?
Not how it works, the bottom will still be on the bottom if everyone gets paid more. Prices will rise accordingly to adjust for the inflation.
So okay, now you make $20 an hour. But bread is now $5 instead of $2.50 because the entire country just got a pay raise.. Youre still in the same boat.
You cant just give everyone more money and expect inflation not to occur. Thats why we "can't wrap our heads around it."

Stop with the scare tactics already. No one is advocating for "doubling everyone's pay." And not everyone is going to get "a pay raise." Someone making more than minimum wage is not going to have their pay doubled, no matter what you think the effect of inflation might be. What's the inflation rate in Seattle, I wonder?

But that is exactly what was proposed. I pointed out many jobs currently get paid $15-$20 that require education, training and skills. What will happen to those jobs. The reply was to increase their wages as well. That wasnt my response, that was the solution proposed. Read the statement I was responding to.
If you dont agree with that, then what do you think will happen to all jobs currently in the $15-$20 range than require training, education and specialized skills. 
Its a serious question, its not a scare tactic. What do you think will happen to the just out of college level jobs that pay $15-$20 an hour, when minimum wage becomes $15? They are going to stay the same, and essentially become a minimum wage jobs next to McDs? Or will they raise those wages to remain competative...which is essentially what you call scare tactics. Is there a third option to raising wages or not raising wages? Doesnt seem possible there could be, so either those skilled jobs become minimum wage jobs, or a large portion of society gets a raise.

There will always be "minimum wage" jobs, right? Those at the basement of the wage scale. Folks making $20 an hour in Seattle aren't going to quit or demand a $5.00 an hour pay raise because the minimum went to $15 an hour in 2021. That difference is stil $200 a wee or $8K a year. Worth the effort of additional education or college, in my opinion. Maybe not yours. It's not going to increase wages across the wage sector. Where I work, the unions regularly negotiate better than inflation pay increases. Do I get the same 

mace1229

And back to my original point why I even brought this up. Liberals are seen as wanting to help, and conservatives are seen as self serving. Was even mentioned as such in this thread.  I disagree. I wasn't trying to convince anyone about minimum wage. Just pointing out there are reasons that are not self serving for the stances they have. Minimum wage was just the example I mentioned. Maybe you think my reasons are moronic, and maybe you'll be proven right. But it isn't about not wanting to help, we see it as creating a bigger burden than it solves.

rgambs

mace1229 said:

I dont think its a scare tactic point things out like a starting teacher in many states will make low to mid 30's. That is after 4 years of college, a year of getting a teaching credential that includes working for free, full time, for 6 months, hours of testing and paperwork just to get the credential. Or, someone who dropped out of high school can make close to that working at a new minimum wage of $15 an hour. And in 5 years, by the time their friends finished school and college, probably got promoted to assistant manager making $20 or $25 now.
Meanwhile, the teacher is starting out his new career, $80,000 in debt, and making less than his friend who never graduated high school.

Arguing that professions don't make enough so those without professions shouldn't make more doesn't make sense. 
A rising tide lifts all boats... Unless you start at the bottom, you can't do that apparently.

Oh and by the way, inflation already occured, the wage hikes are only trying to keep pace, obviously.

jeffbr

mace1229 said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary.
I think it was the CEO of Burger King who said if it goes to $15, he'll be firing half the employees and installing automated ordering systems because the cost will be too high. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Yes, which puts more people in higher rates of consumption, which is what drives an economy.  
It's beyond common sense, and yet conservatives can't wrap their minds around the fact that more people spending more money is better for the economy than less people having more money.

So if you double everyone's pay, that solves poverty?
Not how it works, the bottom will still be on the bottom if everyone gets paid more. Prices will rise accordingly to adjust for the inflation.
So okay, now you make $20 an hour. But bread is now $5 instead of $2.50 because the entire country just got a pay raise.. Youre still in the same boat.
You cant just give everyone more money and expect inflation not to occur. Thats why we "can't wrap our heads around it."

This is the part I don't get either. I used to try to enter into the minimum wage discussions, but tend not to venture in very often because they don't end up making any sense. If you currently have a couple of pay grades in your business, say $10 for new employees and $15 for employees who are experienced, senior employees, and suddenly minimum wage is raised from $10 to $15, do you pay both $15? Or do you now bump the senior employees to $20? If you leave the seniors at $15, good luck retaining employees. You'll now have a business filled with unskilled labor offering substandard quality products and services. If you bump the senior employees to $20, you've now radically increased labor costs. If you run a tight margin business, that leaves you with a couple of options - fewer employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners), fewer hours for employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners) or increased prices for your goods or services (to compensate for increased labor costs). That pay increase doesn't just come out of some unicorn's fart. So if you raise prices of your burgers from $7 to $10, will you still sell the same number of burgers because people now have customers with additional income, or will those same people who struggled at $10 an hour, now struggle at $15 because costs are rising for all of the things they need to purchase. Due to the rise in cost for that burger and everything else, discretionary spending won't necessarily increase. Inflation has taken care of that. So we're left with status quo, but people's checks "appear" to be larger, and Uncle Sam can now grab more of it. Yippee! What's been accomplished? (aside from people feeling good that they passed a bill increasing wages for everyone).

But ultimately I think the minimum wage discussion is a distraction. It has nothing to do with a living wage even though people interchange minimum wage with living wage. The reality, based on the link from the Bureau of Labor Statistics posted by Halifax clearly shows that the low income earners are young, unmarried, part-time, less educated and living in the South. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage for the breadwinner of the family. It was intended for a low-skilled, young person trying to earn weed, beer and gas money and to give them a start at learning to hold a job. PJSoul made a good point about the inadequacy of a federal minimum wage, since a vast disparity exists between economies of locales around the country. Seattle's $15/hr minimum wage has been brought up, but again, that is in no way a living wage for this area. A family of 4 making $72,000 in Seattle is now considered low income (median income is $96.000). That's the problem. The other problem is that while median income in Seattle is $96,000, the median house price in Seattle is $722,000, doubled from just 5 years ago . So even if you aren't "low income" and are making the median income, you cannot afford to buy a house here. It is even worse in San Francisco. 

So if people want to champion a minimum wage to make themselves feel better, go for it. The reality is that your cause won't do shit to address the inability of working families being able to make a living wage or to ever afford a home in many areas.

Halifax2TheMax

mace1229 said:

And back to my original point why I even brought this up. Liberals are seen as wanting to help, and conservatives are seen as self serving. Was even mentioned as such in this thread.  I disagree. I wasn't trying to convince anyone about minimum wage. Just pointing out there are reasons that are not self serving for the stances they have. Minimum wage was just the example I mentioned. Maybe you think my reasons are moronic, and maybe you'll be proven right. But it isn't about not wanting to help, we see it as creating a bigger burden than it solves.

What is this burden of which you speak? Facts matter, hashtag.

Halifax2TheMax

Notice, if you will, that they don't blame the rise in the minimum wage:

https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/news-release/consumerpriceindex_seattle.htm

Halifax2TheMax

Thanks Donny, for the rise in oil and gas prices.

Halifax2TheMax

jeffbr said:

mace1229 said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary.
I think it was the CEO of Burger King who said if it goes to $15, he'll be firing half the employees and installing automated ordering systems because the cost will be too high. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Yes, which puts more people in higher rates of consumption, which is what drives an economy.  
It's beyond common sense, and yet conservatives can't wrap their minds around the fact that more people spending more money is better for the economy than less people having more money.

So if you double everyone's pay, that solves poverty?
Not how it works, the bottom will still be on the bottom if everyone gets paid more. Prices will rise accordingly to adjust for the inflation.
So okay, now you make $20 an hour. But bread is now $5 instead of $2.50 because the entire country just got a pay raise.. Youre still in the same boat.
You cant just give everyone more money and expect inflation not to occur. Thats why we "can't wrap our heads around it."

This is the part I don't get either. I used to try to enter into the minimum wage discussions, but tend not to venture in very often because they don't end up making any sense. If you currently have a couple of pay grades in your business, say $10 for new employees and $15 for employees who are experienced, senior employees, and suddenly minimum wage is raised from $10 to $15, do you pay both $15? Or do you now bump the senior employees to $20? If you leave the seniors at $15, good luck retaining employees. You'll now have a business filled with unskilled labor offering substandard quality products and services. If you bump the senior employees to $20, you've now radically increased labor costs. If you run a tight margin business, that leaves you with a couple of options - fewer employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners), fewer hours for employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners) or increased prices for your goods or services (to compensate for increased labor costs). That pay increase doesn't just come out of some unicorn's fart. So if you raise prices of your burgers from $7 to $10, will you still sell the same number of burgers because people now have customers with additional income, or will those same people who struggled at $10 an hour, now struggle at $15 because costs are rising for all of the things they need to purchase. Due to the rise in cost for that burger and everything else, discretionary spending won't necessarily increase. Inflation has taken care of that. So we're left with status quo, but people's checks "appear" to be larger, and Uncle Sam can now grab more of it. Yippee! What's been accomplished? (aside from people feeling good that they passed a bill increasing wages for everyone).

But ultimately I think the minimum wage discussion is a distraction. It has nothing to do with a living wage even though people interchange minimum wage with living wage. The reality, based on the link from the Bureau of Labor Statistics posted by Halifax clearly shows that the low income earners are young, unmarried, part-time, less educated and living in the South. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage for the breadwinner of the family. It was intended for a low-skilled, young person trying to earn weed, beer and gas money and to give them a start at learning to hold a job. PJSoul made a good point about the inadequacy of a federal minimum wage, since a vast disparity exists between economies of locales around the country. Seattle's $15/hr minimum wage has been brought up, but again, that is in no way a living wage for this area. A family of 4 making $72,000 in Seattle is now considered low income (median income is $96.000). That's the problem. The other problem is that while median income in Seattle is $96,000, the median house price in Seattle is $722,000, doubled from just 5 years ago . So even if you aren't "low income" and are making the median income, you cannot afford to buy a house here. It is even worse in San Francisco. 

So if people want to champion a minimum wage to make themselves feel better, go for it. The reality is that your cause won't do shit to address the inability of working families being able to make a living wage or to ever afford a home in many areas.

Nobody is claiming that a minimum wage should afford you to buy a house. Man you guys shift the goal posts. A lot.

jeffbr

Halifax2TheMax said:

jeffbr said:

mace1229 said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary.
I think it was the CEO of Burger King who said if it goes to $15, he'll be firing half the employees and installing automated ordering systems because the cost will be too high. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Yes, which puts more people in higher rates of consumption, which is what drives an economy.  
It's beyond common sense, and yet conservatives can't wrap their minds around the fact that more people spending more money is better for the economy than less people having more money.

So if you double everyone's pay, that solves poverty?
Not how it works, the bottom will still be on the bottom if everyone gets paid more. Prices will rise accordingly to adjust for the inflation.
So okay, now you make $20 an hour. But bread is now $5 instead of $2.50 because the entire country just got a pay raise.. Youre still in the same boat.
You cant just give everyone more money and expect inflation not to occur. Thats why we "can't wrap our heads around it."

This is the part I don't get either. I used to try to enter into the minimum wage discussions, but tend not to venture in very often because they don't end up making any sense. If you currently have a couple of pay grades in your business, say $10 for new employees and $15 for employees who are experienced, senior employees, and suddenly minimum wage is raised from $10 to $15, do you pay both $15? Or do you now bump the senior employees to $20? If you leave the seniors at $15, good luck retaining employees. You'll now have a business filled with unskilled labor offering substandard quality products and services. If you bump the senior employees to $20, you've now radically increased labor costs. If you run a tight margin business, that leaves you with a couple of options - fewer employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners), fewer hours for employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners) or increased prices for your goods or services (to compensate for increased labor costs). That pay increase doesn't just come out of some unicorn's fart. So if you raise prices of your burgers from $7 to $10, will you still sell the same number of burgers because people now have customers with additional income, or will those same people who struggled at $10 an hour, now struggle at $15 because costs are rising for all of the things they need to purchase. Due to the rise in cost for that burger and everything else, discretionary spending won't necessarily increase. Inflation has taken care of that. So we're left with status quo, but people's checks "appear" to be larger, and Uncle Sam can now grab more of it. Yippee! What's been accomplished? (aside from people feeling good that they passed a bill increasing wages for everyone).

But ultimately I think the minimum wage discussion is a distraction. It has nothing to do with a living wage even though people interchange minimum wage with living wage. The reality, based on the link from the Bureau of Labor Statistics posted by Halifax clearly shows that the low income earners are young, unmarried, part-time, less educated and living in the South. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage for the breadwinner of the family. It was intended for a low-skilled, young person trying to earn weed, beer and gas money and to give them a start at learning to hold a job. PJSoul made a good point about the inadequacy of a federal minimum wage, since a vast disparity exists between economies of locales around the country. Seattle's $15/hr minimum wage has been brought up, but again, that is in no way a living wage for this area. A family of 4 making $72,000 in Seattle is now considered low income (median income is $96.000). That's the problem. The other problem is that while median income in Seattle is $96,000, the median house price in Seattle is $722,000, doubled from just 5 years ago . So even if you aren't "low income" and are making the median income, you cannot afford to buy a house here. It is even worse in San Francisco. 

So if people want to champion a minimum wage to make themselves feel better, go for it. The reality is that your cause won't do shit to address the inability of working families being able to make a living wage or to ever afford a home in many areas.

Nobody is claiming that a minimum wage should afford you to buy a house. Man you guys shift the goal posts. A lot.

Not sure who "you guys" are who you referred to, and not sure what you are trying to accomplish with the minimum wage. More weed money for non-skilled stoners?

Edit: and as I specifically said, I don't really give much of a shit about the minimum wage. It is a distraction from the real issue of families trying to make a living wage (nothing to do with minimum wage) trying to afford to live day-to-day. It isn't just about buying a house. If house prices are high, it follows that rent prices are high as well. Around here millennials are moving out of the city in droves in search of affordable housing and a future. They aren't minimum wage earners. You're the one stuck on minimum wage. I was trying to make the point that there is a larger problem. This isn't a minimum wage thread, so I didn't think it was against the rules to make a tangential point. But if you'd prefer that this be a minimum wage thread, have at it.

Halifax2TheMax

jeffbr said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

jeffbr said:

mace1229 said:

rgambs said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary.
I think it was the CEO of Burger King who said if it goes to $15, he'll be firing half the employees and installing automated ordering systems because the cost will be too high. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Yes, which puts more people in higher rates of consumption, which is what drives an economy.  
It's beyond common sense, and yet conservatives can't wrap their minds around the fact that more people spending more money is better for the economy than less people having more money.

So if you double everyone's pay, that solves poverty?
Not how it works, the bottom will still be on the bottom if everyone gets paid more. Prices will rise accordingly to adjust for the inflation.
So okay, now you make $20 an hour. But bread is now $5 instead of $2.50 because the entire country just got a pay raise.. Youre still in the same boat.
You cant just give everyone more money and expect inflation not to occur. Thats why we "can't wrap our heads around it."

This is the part I don't get either. I used to try to enter into the minimum wage discussions, but tend not to venture in very often because they don't end up making any sense. If you currently have a couple of pay grades in your business, say $10 for new employees and $15 for employees who are experienced, senior employees, and suddenly minimum wage is raised from $10 to $15, do you pay both $15? Or do you now bump the senior employees to $20? If you leave the seniors at $15, good luck retaining employees. You'll now have a business filled with unskilled labor offering substandard quality products and services. If you bump the senior employees to $20, you've now radically increased labor costs. If you run a tight margin business, that leaves you with a couple of options - fewer employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners), fewer hours for employees (so that your labor cost remains flat - doesn't help minimum wage earners) or increased prices for your goods or services (to compensate for increased labor costs). That pay increase doesn't just come out of some unicorn's fart. So if you raise prices of your burgers from $7 to $10, will you still sell the same number of burgers because people now have customers with additional income, or will those same people who struggled at $10 an hour, now struggle at $15 because costs are rising for all of the things they need to purchase. Due to the rise in cost for that burger and everything else, discretionary spending won't necessarily increase. Inflation has taken care of that. So we're left with status quo, but people's checks "appear" to be larger, and Uncle Sam can now grab more of it. Yippee! What's been accomplished? (aside from people feeling good that they passed a bill increasing wages for everyone).

But ultimately I think the minimum wage discussion is a distraction. It has nothing to do with a living wage even though people interchange minimum wage with living wage. The reality, based on the link from the Bureau of Labor Statistics posted by Halifax clearly shows that the low income earners are young, unmarried, part-time, less educated and living in the South. Minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage for the breadwinner of the family. It was intended for a low-skilled, young person trying to earn weed, beer and gas money and to give them a start at learning to hold a job. PJSoul made a good point about the inadequacy of a federal minimum wage, since a vast disparity exists between economies of locales around the country. Seattle's $15/hr minimum wage has been brought up, but again, that is in no way a living wage for this area. A family of 4 making $72,000 in Seattle is now considered low income (median income is $96.000). That's the problem. The other problem is that while median income in Seattle is $96,000, the median house price in Seattle is $722,000, doubled from just 5 years ago . So even if you aren't "low income" and are making the median income, you cannot afford to buy a house here. It is even worse in San Francisco. 

So if people want to champion a minimum wage to make themselves feel better, go for it. The reality is that your cause won't do shit to address the inability of working families being able to make a living wage or to ever afford a home in many areas.

Nobody is claiming that a minimum wage should afford you to buy a house. Man you guys shift the goal posts. A lot.

Not sure who "you guys" are who you referred to, and not sure what you are trying to accomplish with the minimum wage. More weed money for non-skilled stoners?

Edit: and as I specifically said, I don't really give much of a shit about the minimum wage. It is a distraction from the real issue of families trying to make a living wage (nothing to do with minimum wage) trying to afford to live day-to-day. It isn't just about buying a house. If house prices are high, it follows that rent prices are high as well. Around here millennials are moving out of the city in droves in search of affordable housing and a future. They aren't minimum wage earners. You're the one stuck on minimum wage. I was trying to make the point that there is a larger problem. This isn't a minimum wage thread, so I didn't think it was against the rules to make a tangential point. But if you'd prefer that this be a minimum wage thread, have at it.

Wow, just wow. Okay. Wow. Now it's about rent. You guys claim that raising the minimum wage to, pick a number, results in catastrophic wage and inflation misery. I've read BS regarding jobs, technology, housing and inflation. All I'm asking for are facts and answers to your supposition, where has it been proven that more disposable income, for a small minority of the population results in this ruin? Seattle home prices are driven by minimum wage increases to $15 an hour? Really? Blame pj instead because BBH moved there, ok?

facts matter.

Halifax2TheMax

"Their moving out in droves." Funny, because they were living there. But now, omg, $15 minimum wage in 2021 is forcing them out? Seems like rugged individualism is failing. Trump will MAGA.

jeffbr

Halifax2TheMax said:

"Their moving out in droves." Funny, because they were living there. But now, omg, $15 minimum wage in 2021 is forcing them out? Seems like rugged individualism is failing. Trump will MAGA.

Your drinking is affecting your reading comprehension. I never once said anything about minimum wage creating the current situation of millennials "moving out in droves". I specifically created another paragraph for that, and mentioned that that was a bigger issue than minimum wage, and that the minimum wage issue was a distraction to the larger issue of families not earning living wages sufficient to make ends meet. That is a much larger population, and a much more important issue than non-skilled, low educated people making a few bucks more for their beer fund. Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, Google wage disparity is contributing to urban flight in Seattle currently. I said I'm more concerned with that than with this minimum wage nonsense. Raising the minimum wage will not afford those low earners to have any sort of living wage in this area regardless of how much you raise it. But keep on keeping on with the $15/hr mantra. Once we can get all workers throughout the country earning $15/hr we'll have achieved nirvana. I can't wait to experience the $15/hr utopia where all our wants and needs are met, and businesses are thriving and more profitable due to their higher labor costs. That will be super cool.

Halifax2TheMax

875,000 workers, approximately, earn minimum wage. Keep on keeping on about how that % of approximately 13 million wage earners is going to upset the apple cart. Keep on keeping on being a shill for corporate profits or small business. Link me some facts that posits that more disposable income in the form of wages, tax cuts or inheritance or any other means of "having more" results in the dire predictions of failing mom and pops, higher unemployment or inability to "live." With a roof over your head or be replaced by a robot. And where previously, prior to this post I'm quoting, did you reference seattles big 3?

Halifax2TheMax

You mentioned folks leaving in droves without context. My drinking is but an abbretion. 

mace1229

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

And back to my original point why I even brought this up. Liberals are seen as wanting to help, and conservatives are seen as self serving. Was even mentioned as such in this thread.  I disagree. I wasn't trying to convince anyone about minimum wage. Just pointing out there are reasons that are not self serving for the stances they have. Minimum wage was just the example I mentioned. Maybe you think my reasons are moronic, and maybe you'll be proven right. But it isn't about not wanting to help, we see it as creating a bigger burden than it solves.

What is this burden of which you speak? Facts matter, hashtag.

I thought I gave several examples.
1. Small family businesses. I worked for a small family for 2 years while in college. Great family, got to know them very well. They paid us $9/hr because he wanted his employees a little above minimum wage. There were about 6 of us, if he had to pay us each an additional $7 an hour, he would have closed his doors and been better off working minimum wage himself. If his small business was exempt, no one would have worked there. This is not an isolated example, many small family run business would be in the same boat.
2. Employees will lose jobs. Store owners will be more likely to go automated or reduce the number of employees.
3. The example of a tiered business structure that has been mentioned a couple times. If tarting wage is $10 now, and $15 in a year or when you get a promotion, how is the minimum wage not going to trickle up? If you dont increase the wage then you wont retain employees, and probably get fewer to begin with, and if you do you just increased the cost of business by quite a bit. Most likelt resulting in higher costs to customers. Thats basically how every fast food works. You get 8$ to start, if you hang in there for 6 months you get a raise. 6 months later you get a promotion with a new title and are now making $15.

You could disagree and think the impact is nominal and thats fine. What I dont get it is seems like you think these issues dont even exist, like I'm the first to think of them and bring them up. If it isnt going to impact small businesses, then why are they exempt in some cases? And do you really think if they are exempt that anyone will be willing to work there, when next door they can make double? Anyone with exempt status will never get another employee again, and if they pay the minimum wage they go under.
Several companies have threatened to reduce employees. Including the CEO of Carls Jr. when it was brought up you just brushed it off as "you cant fight technology." But he specifically said he would go automated IF the minimum wage was raised to $15. Technology is already out there to do it, but it isnt used widely because it still makes sense to hire an actual employee.
The only point that I havent seen argued by any professional is that last one, but that seems like the most common sense to me. You increase starting wage, it'l trickle up.

Lastly, I dont get the argument for the family living wage. Most minimum wage are high school or college students, working part time, not single moms with 3 kids. A quick Google search to verify, the top 4 search results all said the same thing. More than half or under 25, 70-80% are part time, nearly the same percentage are students, very few are actually the head of the household with primary income. Of course some would benefit, but with 3% of the working population being over 25 making minimum wage (and that still includes students and part-time workers), very few were primary incomes. It just seems to me to make sense that more workers, like those running a small business, would be hurt compared to those who would be helped.
I didnt bother digging into all the resources, but when the top 4 search results say the same thing it seems consistent. 
http://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/who-earns-the-minimum-wage-suburban-teenagers-not-single-parents

Halifax2TheMax

Maybe, just maybe, you should consider the ultra rich. Those who can afford to buy housing in desirable locales, if just for the weekend. Vancouver, NYC, Seattle, LA, Boston, etc. The world has gotten rich but you can blame the "working family" all you want. Go ahead, check the rate and monetary flow of foreign investment in US real estate, go ahead. And Trump doesn't profit? Sure.

so, all those Starbucks baristas in Seattle commute from Portland?

unsung

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

cincybearcat said:

mcgruff10 said:

Left on social issues, right on economics. Left on environment, right on second amendment. 

Left on a lot of social, but not all, some I'm decently far right.  Right on economics mostly.  Center on environment...been moving left compared to the maintstream right.  Far left on 2nd amendment.

Can someone tell me what right on economics is? Because to me it's corporate handouts and deficit spending. 

to me  it's lower taxes and less government.  waaaay too much government out there. tax cuts for corporations that stay in america instead of going overseas. I always equated deficit spending with democrats but I could be wrong.

hugh, i'm definitely to the right when it comes to the 2nd amendment but I believe in back ground checks, training and registration.

the only issue i'm still on the fence about is the death penalty.  
but yeah i'm right in the middle.  

Does too much government mean too much spending, too many government employees, or too much regulation?

Yes

unsung

tbergs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mace1229 said:

There were/are politicians who did seek to raise the minimum to $15 immediately, with a plan to increase to $20 over the next couple of years. It has been debated for a few years now.

What research do you need that if someone currently goes to school for 4 years just to make $22/hr, they will no longer be able to fill those jobs if minimum wage is $20, unless they also increase that pay?
What research do you need if a family run business pays 6 employees $10/hr and profits about 80k/year, they will be better off getting a minimum wage job themself than to pay each employee $20/hr. And the the 6 employees are out of a job.
Yes, its a lot of speculation. But it makes common sense to most. National average for EMT is right around $20hr (some places even less). How many will strive to be an EMT if they can just work at the local McD's, or anywhere and make that same amount without a high school diploma?
So either an EMT should make minimum wage, along with everyone else with specific training and skills, or those jobs will increase too. And that is just inflation, and helps no one.
EMT is just one example of hundreds of jobs that a huge increase of minimum wage would have a drastic impact on. Either they become a minimum wage job too with all their training and skills, or you increase that salary. Either way it will hurt more than it benefits.

Because everything I've read about it is that small, family businesses with less than X number of employees (15 sticks in my mind) is exempt. And there are many exemptions state to state. Some go full bore, others not so much. Which politicians and which states or Feds are arguing for $20 per hour? I've never read that or heard about it. Debated and being enacted are two completely different things. Seeing how you won't address questions and are relying on supposition, here's some facts:

https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employmentdata/docs/economic-reports/current-monthly-employment-report.pdf

I'm not arguing that the unemployment rate is due to Seattle's drive to $15.00 an hour but its not having the effect that you claim, either. Also, Starbucks pays their part time employees $15.00 an hour and provides paid time off and college tuition assistance. Has Starbucks gone out of business? Has DD or Tim Horton's raised their prices as a result? Do any of them have trouble finding labor? I'm not sure it will hurt more than it'll help. Would you argue that WalMart can't afford to pay their folks more? Have you seen WalMarts profit margin and dollar amounts for the 7 members of the WalMart family? And why is it always good to give the rich or corporations tax cuts? People spend money. Spent money creates jobs. Created jobs tighten the labor market. Tightened labor market raises wages. Which by the way have been stagnant for decades, despite increased productivity and record corporate profits. Facts.

Yes, small business will be exempt based on employees and company, but if the mom and pop shop only pays $10 and the gas station is paying $15.00, where are people going to work? As it has been stated already, educated and field trained employees starting at around $20.00 are going to want to see wage increases at the base levels if you want to retain or attract new employees, which then only trickles up among the middle class wage earners. You're still not really hurting the upper class, but you are creating an upheaval at the low -middle class wage levels. There is going to have to be some disparity in the wage ranges to make the benefit of an education or specialized training a significantly bigger pay off to start with. I worked at a family owned business as a teenager and I think the small business minimum wage at the time was .50 below regular, so in order for this to work, the small businesses would need to be within at least $1.00 of large businesses. By the time I was working in my field, I was making around $15.00/more than minimum wage 

unsung

New quote system is terrible.  It is way too jumpy to use on mobile.

mcgruff10

unsung said:

Go Beavers said:

mcgruff10 said:

Go Beavers said:

cincybearcat said:

mcgruff10 said:

Left on social issues, right on economics. Left on environment, right on second amendment. 

Left on a lot of social, but not all, some I'm decently far right.  Right on economics mostly.  Center on environment...been moving left compared to the maintstream right.  Far left on 2nd amendment.

Can someone tell me what right on economics is? Because to me it's corporate handouts and deficit spending. 

to me  it's lower taxes and less government.  waaaay too much government out there. tax cuts for corporations that stay in america instead of going overseas. I always equated deficit spending with democrats but I could be wrong.

hugh, i'm definitely to the right when it comes to the 2nd amendment but I believe in back ground checks, training and registration.

the only issue i'm still on the fence about is the death penalty.  
but yeah i'm right in the middle.  

Does too much government mean too much spending, too many government employees, or too much regulation?

Yes

agreed