tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

I would assume if minimum wage was $15, then any salary worker would have to be paid the equivalent of that, right? One I thought they would have to by law. But if not, then who would take a salary job that is equal to $10/hr when you can work the local putt-putt course for $15?

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

I would assume if minimum wage was $15, then any salary worker would have to be paid the equivalent of that, right? One I thought they would have to by law. But if not, then who would take a salary job that is equal to $10/hr when you can work the local putt-putt course for $15?

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

mickeyrat said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

tell what minimim wage job has 100% covered health care. housing benefits for off base living, uniform allowance, cut rate travel on military flights, and more

mickeyrat said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

tell what minimim wage job has 100% covered health care. housing benefits for off base living, uniform allowance, cut rate travel on military flights, and more

mickeyrat said:

mace1229 said:

mickeyrat said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

mickeyrat said:

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Lerxst1992 said:

benjs said:

Meltdown99 said:

Here is a FUCKING novel idea...pay your employees a liveable wage and charge the appropriate amount to the customers...fucking cheap ass business owners...if you can not pay liveable wages maybe you shouldn’t be a business owner...

1. Large organizations have massive economies of scale, meaning the cost of production or product acquisition is typically greater to a small business
2. Large organizations don't have the all-at-once overhead of launching a new business without a steady revenue stream
3. The workforce will determine whether the wages offered were reasonable or not. If there's still a vacancy in a job posting after enough time, it's not meeting the short-term requirements for the job market. If the position has high turnover, it's likely not meeting the long-term requirements. In either case, the business's results will determine whether the move was right or wrong
4. At the time when a business is conceptualized, they rarely have the means to execute on their vision without compromise, and sometimes without helping hands, it can never materialize (aka the idea dies outright)
5. Profit sharing and other creative business structures can help mitigate these small business realities

these points ignore the fact the US minimum wage has been held artificially low for decades. If it were increased ONLY on an inflation  basis the past 50 years, it’d be over $20 an hour now.

further, the US has had a massive crackdown against worker rights during this time period.

the combination of these two forces has limited the workers ability to have ANY ability to impact how wages are “determined” at the low end of the pay scale.

so keeping wages artificially low, far below the historical inflation adjusted value has enabled small business owners to enter the economy when in fact they should not have been able to afford it, based on the historical cost to operate a small business.

In the US, what this means is taxpayers will have to foot the bill by paying for housing and food assistance for employees earning below poverty level wages from small business owners.

it is time to ensure all wages are paid at or above the poverty level, and stop the practice of paying welfare to small business owners by allowing them to stay in business by subsidizing their workforce, when by all measures they should not be in business if they are paying poverty level wages.

I think they said it would be $9 an hour with inflation?

Here is something else to throw in the mix.  All of the military would get a raise.  That's a lot of extra money the government will be paying out to servicemen.

Really? I just assumed they were on a salary. 

they are. $x per month. bennies out the ass.

Then I don't quite understand Tempo's point.  

They get paid shit so does their pay increase?  They make the equivalent of $10 an hour.  If the minimum wage goes up shouldn't their pay increase?

That is what I am getting at.

tell what minimim wage job has 100% covered health care. housing benefits for off base living, uniform allowance, cut rate travel on military flights, and more

There's probably an equal number of minimum wage jobs that offer full health care as there are ones that require multiple $500 uniforms and require you to relocate out of state multiple times in the first few years.

do you have any knowledge as to care received by active duty?

cutz said:

 https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/01/02/seattle-passed-a-15-minimum-wage-law-in-2014-heres-how-its-turned-out-so-far.html?__twitter_impression=true&s=03

RESTAURANTS

Seattle passed a $15 minimum wage law in 2014. Here's how it's turned out so far

PUBLISHED THU, JAN 2 2020 10:31 AM EST

UPDATED THU, JAN 2 2020 12:58 PM EST

Kate Rogersid.

When Seattle began raising its minimum wage five years ago, local burger joint Dick's Drive-In experienced an unintended effect.

Its employees opted to work fewer hours as their wages rose, a tall order in a tight labor market.

"We thought with higher wages it would be easier to get people to take more hours, but it's been the opposite," said Jasmine Donovan, president of Dick's. She added that the company has had to raise prices for the first time in its history because of the cost of labor alone, whereas in the past, food costs drove such hikes.

Seattle's law, which gradually increases its minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2021 from just over $9 an hour in 2014, is now at the forefront of a national debate over the impacts of progressive wage increases. It comes at a time when top Democratic presidential candidates like Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden are calling for a $15 per hour federal minimum wage as they try to appeal to working-class voters. The federal minimum wage is currently $7.25 an hour and has not been increased in over a decade.

"Seattle was catalytic to the entire national movement because what the Seattle City Council did by passing the law was show the entire nation that $15 was not a ridiculous demand that people were laughing at back in 2012, but an actual key piece of policy that allowed for working people all across that city to have more money in their pockets that they spent in their local neighborhoods and then grew the economy and local business as a result," said Mary Kay Henry, president of the Service Employees International Union, which launched the Fight for $15 and a Union campaign.

Businesses like Dick's have seen their costs go up. Dick's pays above minimum wage, with some locations starting workers at $17 and $18 an hour, and most workers are students in their 20s. Benefits like 401(k) plans and health insurance are also available to workers regardless of the number of hours worked. But higher minimum wages citywide pressure employers to increase pay even if they are already above that threshold, in order to compete for talent.

Meanwhile, the Seattle law has been life changing for workers like Martin Johnson, who lobbied for higher pay with the advocacy group Working Washington. He works three minimum wage jobs — as a temporary cook on game days at the city's stadiums, as a janitor at Costco on the overnight shift and as a handyman in his own small business. The raise brought with it more dignity for workers and boosted morale, he said.

"Instead of being paid $9 an hour, you're getting $15 an hour to do the same work. You feel better about yourself — you feel appreciated," Johnson, 54, said.

CNBC: Martin Johnson works three minimum wage jobs, and advocated for higher pay in the city.

Martin Johnson works three minimum wage jobs, and advocated for higher pay in the city. He says wage increases have brought workers more dignity and boosted morale.

Overall, implications for businesses and workers alike have been nuanced. While there are benefits for workers who saw higher pay, others may have seen fewer hours. Some businesses flourished, while others struggled in the face of greater regulation and intense competition in the city's hot economy.

No consensus among economists

Studies of the effects of the Seattle wage hike have had different findings: A 2017 University of Washington study found that while wages went up, hours worked declined, resulting in less pay for low-wage workers. But in a follow-up published last year, the authors noted that this wasn't the case for everyone, and experienced workers in low-wage jobs saw their earnings rise.

Another from researchers at the University of California, Berkeley released in 2018 found that the wage hikes increased pay and have not led to job losses. The Berkeley and Washington studies measured different groups of workers, with varying results.

The conflicting studies highlight a broader debate about what a $15 federal minimum wage might do for businesses and workers nationwide. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell even touched on the issue during his testimony before the House of Representatives this summer saying. "there is no consensus among economists … economists are all over the place on this."

One of the challenges of measuring Seattle's experience with the minimum wage hike is that the city's economy is in a period of robust growth. Since the wage increase began in 2015, Seattle/Tacoma's job growth has slightly outpaced the state of Washington as a whole, at 12.9%. The city's population has increased some 13% over 2015, according to the Washington state Office of Financial Management. Average hourly earnings were $39.38 in October, an increase of 14.5% from the same month in 2015.

That prompts a question: Are higher wages necessary due to the hot economy, or has the economy continued to grow due to higher pay?

Mixed results for businesses

When the minimum wage increase in Seattle passed, Chad Mackay, CEO of Fire & Vine Hospitality, a Pacific Northwest hospitality group, he decided to reevaluate his business model.

"When we projected out the minimum wage increases, and the loss of a tip credit [which allows employers to count tips toward minimum wage], we realized we would be functionally bankrupt if you were to fast forward seven years in the future. We decided the business model was broken, and it's time for us to change," Mackay said.

Fire & Vine has long paid above minimum wage in the front and back of house due to demand for talent in the market and the company's beliefs on professional pay. The company moved to a commission-based model, with a 20% service charge for diners. Servers are paid out an hourly wage and a 15% commission and can make $70 or more per hour in the Seattle market, up from some $45 an hour earlier. Guests can also leave extra tips for servers if desired. Those in the back of the house like dishwashers begin between $17 and $20 an hour — some 40% over where they were prior.

The wage increases haven't hurt his business: He's nearly doubled in size, with some 600 workers today with 12 locations under management, during a time when other restaurants have closed their doors.

"Once we went to that model, I have never worried about minimum wage. And I'm not sure there's a restaurateur in Washington state or in California or New York, that can say, 'We left behind minimum wage as an issue for our company,'" Mackay said.

But while some businesses have thrived, others have faced challenges in the face of Seattle's changing economy.

Matthew Dillon, owner of Sitka & Spruce, says that he believes the minimum wage should be much higher than $15 an hour, which is why he also pays workers above that threshold. But when his lease came up, the James Beard Award-winning chef decided it was time to close his doors after more than a decade in business, serving the restaurant's last dinner on New Year's Eve. Passing off costs to consumers in an environment where his rent was $16,000 per month including taxes and fees, and where both food and labor costs are also on the rise, felt unsustainable. He has other businesses that are still up and running in the area.

"Wages are going up, the price of food is going up, [and] my property taxes that I have to pay the landlord are going up. My rent is going up for my staff, or staff that was here feels like, 'Well I can't be in the city anymore, so you have to find someone to replace me,'" he said. "That's really hard. The cost of that, just working through that as a business owner, is going up."

It's an issue Eric Tanaka is also contending with. The partner at Tom Douglas Seattle Kitchen says the group also decided not to renew a lease for a building that houses three of its restaurants — TanakaSan, Assembly Hall and Home Remedy. Moving forward, Tanaka says he may consider less labor-intensive models, as well as concept and menu tweaks, within the group's different businesses as costs have gone up and talent can be tough to find in the city. The company pays above minimum wage and offers benefits for those working more than 25 hours a week. It recently settled a class-action suit with its employees over service fee charges.

"I think as we start to look at future planning, we are definitely looking at restaurant models that take less labor," Tanaka said.

That could be tough given that his restaurants make things from scratch. "It's hard to be handmade without the hands. But we are looking at different ways to leverage those hands," Tanaka said. "It's a challenge every day because there are less and less people who want to get into our industry."