Left or Right, which way do you lean ?

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.

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

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 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 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.

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

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?

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 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