Minimum Wage Cranks: Wrong About Seattle

[Tico]

Lol. And despite any evidences, they will continue to tell sht.

[d00mGuArD]

Except the increase in buying power among consumers will mean you'll likely still keep your profit because more people can afford to spend at your place. Local restaurants and small business are the main benefactors of increased buying power. Companies like Wal-Mart are the ones who lose out.

This is what people against wage increases keep ignoring. Money at the top gets rolled into stock and offshore accounts. Money at the bottom circulates damn near immediately. Will the local Chinese place have to pay workers more? Yeah. But they'll appreciate a large uptick in sales when more people can afford to eat there once a week instead of once in a blue moon.

Oh I am not really against wage increase. I am against that example
It started using percentages, but for profit switched to fixed amount, which is something I have never seen anywhere

Anytime we calculate profit, we don't even know the amount. We have an excel box next to the cost that multiplies by the profit % we want and only see the end result
I doubt anyone will be using the fixed 0.3 of that example

[Brubear]

They have more money to spend on essentials. Rent being first and foremost. Then basic foodstuff, clothes, etc. Eventually their extra money isn't going to go towards a higher priced meal because "i have more money to spend now!" they're probably still gonna Dollar Menu it, so to speak. That surplus money should be going into savings or retirement or something other than spending more $ just because they have more $, unless they're young and stupid.

*WARNING: COMPLETELY WRONG NUMBERS AHEAD. DO NOT QUOTE THEM*

A company now has a payroll expense increase of 50%. They need to figure the best way to mitigate that expense. Few options: (A) Cut payroll expenses by layoffs. (B) Cut other expenses such as your raw materials or your overhead. (C) Raise prices on finished goods to compensate. (D) Cut employee hours to just barely above the Full-Time threshold. Clearly Seattle didn't go with A, so either the quality of your food is going to go down cause raw materials aren't going to be as good and/or fresh, and/or the price of your food is going to go up. Price of food goes up, the cost of living goes up, and suddenly that surplus isn't there anymore.

or D) the influx of cash into the economy from low-wage earners having more disposable income gets reinvested into the businesses through increased business (as now more people can afford to go patronize these businesses), thus negating the payroll increase.

When low-income earners have more disposable income, they invest it into the economy buy purchasing more necessities and commodities, unlike high-wage and top earners who sit on the cash by either stashing it through investments or luxury items that don't actually have a significant impact on the economy.

[Endus]

You said that minimum wage hikes were always good with no qualification or calculations.

No.

I did not.

You are either lying and don't care, or you cannot read basic English.

You were making 30% profit, and now making 17% profit. Which is a small profit margin. You increased your company's risk
You are no longer paying 70% of the price point to wages (which was enormously high!) you are paying more than 80% to wages (it became more ridiculous)

1> The high rate of wage costs was chosen just to exaggerate the problem; yes, for most industries, it won't be nearly that bad. That's a point that favors me.
2> Profit margins aren't just calculated in percentile increments. And if you want to increase how much profit per item you're making, that's a separate and unrelated factor. Using your profiteering as an argument against a minimum wage increase is not honest.
3> It doesn't really increase the company's risk; you're still making the same profits off the same production. The only risk that's increased is the potential for wage instability, but that's part of what we're trying to solve, here.

I have not heard of anyone having a set amount as profit ($0.3 in your example). Anyone I know is using percentage.

Yes, but I'm doing that solely to keep the amount of profit per item stable, so that we can isolate the effect of the wage increase. We're not scaling all costs up proportional to the wage increase; that's tautological and useless. The question was if wages increase and other factors remain stable, what is the effect on purchasing power. What you're pointing at is me keeping those other factors stable.

If you want to also increase profits, that's fine, but that's not happening due to the wage increase, and blaming it upon that wage increase is misleading.

[Zan15]

I always get a little giggle out of folks who make a bad point, get called out, and then start asking other folks for evidence. You were the original person who came in saying some shit about poor economies under Republican leadership, when anyone with the faculty of most of their senses knows that we're currently under Republican leadership and doing very well economically. There is no citation needed for anything I said to you. You should just realize you made a poorly timed idiotic statement, like any reasonable person would. But instead, you double down and ask for evidence of an easily observable fact. Me asking the same thing back to you about growth numbers, etc. should have been an obvious dig at your idiocy. I don't need citations from you, I already know that you're wrong because I can see and hear.

And for some reason it always ends up being the Eurotrash that does this the most. Aren't you guys getting better educations, supposedly?

What exactly are they doing "very well" with?

Artificially inflating GDP with trade wars, Huge trillion dollar debt spending plans, tariffs and one time infusion of cash to corporations they should have been paying for the last 25 years in taxes? Hell their GDP is estimated to only be 3.1-3.3% even after all this... not even a huge bump from Obama's best year of 2.9%

Employment growth that is slower then the previous 3 years? Stock market that is half the growth rate of the prior administration or greater? Real inflation out growing the bottom 80% wage increase?

Lets face it the economy where its "very well" has benefited only a small portion of this country for the last 10 years+.

[Ragedaug]

This is a useless argument, since wages adjust when the minimum wage does. This is why doctors don't make minimum wage, today

That's the only point I was making with that post. It's the same point you just made. All wages adjust when the minimum wage does. Some people are under the false pretense that the only wages impacted by the increase of minimum wage are those currently making less than the new minimum wage.

- - - Updated - - -

Prior to him posting that, everyone kept popping into the thread saying minimum wage hikes are always good with no calculation of what actually makes it good or bad. I think that was the point he was trying to make. People like you were making obtuse arguments to begin with, when this is actually a definable economic relationship beyond "greater minimum wage is always good".

Thank you Sulla. That's exactly what I was trying to point out and I got called a troll (not directly, but by definition) by a moderator for my effort.

[Mehrunes]

Right wing predictions about the economy where wrong? No way... When has that ever happened before, aside from basically all the time?

[Paraka]

If a business can't pay minimum wage it's probably a failed business and should close anyways.

Depends on how much the workforce they can afford doing exactly that. The company I work for is looking to drop about 20 people by May to raise the min wage cause they cannot afford that many on such a dime. I am expecting this to resonate on a independent company level more so.

Cause McDonald's can easily afford it, but Randi's Pizza down the road may not. Especially the rise in taxes in general over the passed 20 years.

[Very Tired]

And people keep repeating the right-wing talking point of how minimum wage jobs aren't meant to provide a livable wage and to go out and get a nice white collar educated job. Even though there literally aren't nearly enough of those jobs paying higher above minimum wage to go around for the entire working population. Should the ones kept out of them just starve on the streets?

[Orlong]

That's a lie. It's the straw man you invented to derail discussion.



That basically happens as people adjust to the new minimum wage. It's happened every time the minimum wage has been bumped in the past. You're arguing against something you made up, which is at odds to observable history.

And thats all bullshit. I currently make $28 an hour (yeah I know its a pittance compared to what you elites on the board make), but I will NOT be getting a $7.25 an hour raise the day the minimum wage is raised to $15 like all the current minimum wage employees. Itll likely take decades or I may be retired before I hit $35.25 an hour, and its bullshit and unfair for them to get such a large raise without earning it and I dont. Additionally my buying power will be lowered because prices will rise due to more people having more salary

[Shadowferal]

And thats all bullshit. I currently make $28 an hour (yeah I know its a pittance compared to what you elites on the board make), but I will NOT be getting a $7.25 an hour raise the day the minimum wage is raised to $15 like all the current minimum wage employees. Itll likely take decades or I may be retired before I hit $35.25 an hour, and its bullshit and unfair for them to get such a large raise without earning it and I dont. Additionally my buying power will be lowered because prices will rise due to more people having more salary

You have a fucking union...which means a bargaining agreement. And you make a ton of money compared to the cost of living in your red-state.

[buck008]

Actually, he's pointing out the failed logic you and others in this thread have employed to say that minimum wage increases always work out positively for the economy. The fact that you conjured a flawed analogy to map his logic proves that you missed the point.

No. He literally made the “if some is good than more must be better” argument. He wasn’t attacking anyone’s logic. All that was said is that minimum wage increases have not, in the past, destroyed anyone’s economy. His whole point was that $15 was some arbitrary pointless number so we may as well shoot for the moon and pick a really high number. That’s a willful distortion of the argument in an attempt to make it seem foolish by pretending it supposes something that it does not. This road didn’t work for him, it won’t work for you. Stop it.

- - - Updated - - -

You started talking shit about Republicans leading poor economies, in the middle of a reality that is exactly the opposite of that. Are you off your meds?

Trump took over an economy that had a good three years of consecutive job growth. The stock market was at record highs. First home ownership was up. Small business startup was up. GDP was up. Basically every indicator that exists to measure an economy was positive. It’s always been an outright lie that Obama was bad for the economy and Trump inherited a disaster. An easily disprovable lie too. Actually, most of those things have actually slowed since Trump has been in office.

[Orlong]

You have a fucking union...which means a bargaining agreement. And you make a ton of money compared to the cost of living in your red-state.

Doesnt matter. I hate the Union and they will not get us an almost $8 an hour wage the day minimum wage goes up by $8 an hour. Additionally, I dont care if I make enough to live in my state. Its not fair for them to get a raise for doing nothing and not me when it is MY purchasing power that will go down while theirs goes up.

[Captain N]

You have a fucking union...which means a bargaining agreement. And you make a ton of money compared to the cost of living in your red-state.

Yep. He belongs to the AFSCME of Pennsylvania. It's not like you can't go to their website and see exactly what their CBA is.

Here's their agreement book between the workers and the State of Pennsylvania

https://www.afscme13.org/wp-content/...-book-2017.pdf

[buck008]

Thank you Sulla. That's exactly what I was trying to point out and I got called a troll (not directly, but by definition) by a moderator for my effort.

We all understood what you were trying to say. It was wrong when you said it and it’s still wrong when he says it.

- - - Updated - - -

Doesnt matter. I hate the Union and they will not get us an almost $8 an hour wage the day minimum wage goes up by $8 an hour. Additionally, I dont care if I make enough to live in my state. Its not fair for them to get a raise for doing nothing and not me when it is MY purchasing power that will go down while theirs goes up.

No one is getting a raise for doing nothing. People are getting paid for having a job. The only thing that isn’t fair is that a person can work full time in the United States and still make little enough to qualify for food stamps.

[GrinningMan]

We all understood what you were trying to say. It was wrong when you said it and it’s still wrong when he says it.

- - - Updated - - -



No one is getting a raise for doing nothing. People are getting paid for having a job. The only thing that isn’t fair is that a person can work full time in the United States and still make little enough to qualify for food stamps.

If you can even qualify for full time.

[Shadowferal]

Yep. He belongs to the AFSCME of Pennsylvania. It's not like you can't go to their website and see exactly what their CBA is.

Here's their agreement book between the workers and the State of Pennsylvania

https://www.afscme13.org/wp-content/...-book-2017.pdf

He has a sweetheart deal...and claims to hate it.
He can quit any fucking time...and try to make it on his own...with his lack of education I'm sure he can make that $15/hr beginning wage easy enough.
Whether or not it's enough to pay his mortgage...o I guess he won't quit anytime soon after all.

[Captain N]

He has a sweetheart deal...and claims to hate it.
He can quit any fucking time...and try to make it on his own...with his lack of education I'm sure he can make that $15/hr beginning wage easy enough.
Whether or not it's enough to pay his mortgage...o I guess he won't quit anytime soon after all.

Oh I know. As a union man myself I face palm every time he complains about the benefits he gets through a union contract. I brought this up when he was complaining about the union in the Verizon Strike thread. Basically over the last 3 years AFSCME has boosted the pay of it's employees by 12.3% once everything is compounded.

https://www.pennlive.com/politics/in...acts_come.html

A $10/hour full time employee getting that some deal would go from $20,800/year to $23,584/year or $1733/month to $1965/month pre-tax obviously. An extra $200/month is pretty significant to low income workers.

[Orlong]

He has a sweetheart deal...and claims to hate it.
He can quit any fucking time...and try to make it on his own...with his lack of education I'm sure he can make that $15/hr beginning wage easy enough.
Whether or not it's enough to pay his mortgage...o I guess he won't quit anytime soon after all.

I can negotiate my wages better than some suit in Philadelphia. Its such a shame that democrats fight tooth and nail to make it illegal to leave a union and negotiate for yourself

- - - Updated - - -

Oh I know. As a union man myself I face palm every time he complains about the benefits he gets through a union contract. I brought this up when he was complaining about the union in the Verizon Strike thread. Basically over the last 3 years AFSCME has boosted the pay of it's employees by 12.3% once everything is compounded.

https://www.pennlive.com/politics/in...acts_come.html

A $10/hour full time employee getting that some deal would go from $20,800/year to $23,584/year or $1733/month to $1965/month pre-tax obviously. An extra $200/month is pretty significant to low income workers.

And that 12% got wiped away when they changed our health insurance to Aetna and doubled our deductibles and copays

[Captain N]

And that 12% got wiped away when they changed our health insurance to Aetna and doubled our deductibles and copays

Interesting because according to the Contract previously posted (Section 25: Healthcare) it says you only have to give up 2.5% if your bi-weekly earnings and your employer contributions have continued to increase from $455 per employee in 2016 to $486 in 2019. So going off your $28/hour based on a 40 hour work week that's $2240 per paycheck or a contribution of $56. You're still quite the distance ahead even with the alleged rise in co-pays and deductibles.

I'd really like to see you negotiate yourself into full coverage health insurance for $112/month on your own merits.