• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seattle mayor unveils plan for $15 minimum wage

apdst said:
I have to third-world countries and didn't observe prices the same, or higher than The States.
Click to expand...

that's about what I was thinking, there's no way people in latin america making 3 dollars a day have to buy food at US level prices, it simply wouldn't be possible....
 
EMNofSeattle said:
that's about what I was thinking, there's no way people in latin america making 3 dollars a day have to buy food at US level prices, it simply wouldn't be possible....
Click to expand...

Of course it's not!

That entire post is over-flowing with dishonesty. Prices are the same in Greenville, Mississippi are the same as prices in Seattle? There's no way!
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Seattle's economy will continue to grow as a whole due to corporate investment, and only the types who never make minimum wage will benefit.

I believe we need a higher minimum wage, but unless its enacted amongst a backdrop of trade and regulatory reforms a higher minimum wage will not benefit most workers.
Click to expand...

A higher minimum wage, without the market's demand for more labor, won't benefit anyone. The only thing that will accomplish is higher prices for the people that the wage increase is supposed to help. In a few years, we'll be hearing how $15 isn't enough and that it needs to go to $20, then $30 and so on.
 
apdst said:
A higher minimum wage, without the market's demand for more labor, won't benefit anyone. The only thing that will accomplish is higher prices for the people that the wage increase is supposed to help. In a few years, we'll be hearing how $15 isn't enough and that it needs to go to $20, then $30 and so on.
Click to expand...

exactly, telling china to get lost and putting strict import restrictions from other countries and repealing NAFTA. and requiring any countries we trade with have similiar wages and environmental protection laws to us then there will be alot more demand for labor....
 
EMNofSeattle said:
exactly, telling china to get lost and putting strict import restrictions from other countries and repealing NAFTA. and requiring any countries we trade with have similiar wages and environmental protection laws to us then there will be alot more demand for labor....
Click to expand...

And prices on everything would go through the roof. There would no longer be the China option when purchasing products.
 
apdst said:
And prices on everything would go through the roof. There would no longer be the China option when purchasing products.
Click to expand...

Seems rather likely.

If you imagine the economy as being a balloon, and you poke this balloon with a $15 min wage finger, it's going to bulge out someplace else, unpredictably, probably not in a way that you'll want or like very much.
 
apdst said:
And prices on everything would go through the roof. There would no longer be the China option when purchasing products.
Click to expand...

and WAGES will go up too, resulting in people affording to support others livliehoods. when we had trade protection and a 60% unionized workforce in the 50s and 60s we saw a huge era of prosperity. the "trickle down economics" have succeeded in making the rich richer and richer with a shrinking middle class. before long we'll be living in a banana republic at this rate (and for the younger readers, banana republic in this context is not a store at the shopping mall)

and before you use the "class envy" and "class warfare" line, I don't care how you look at it, an increase of 800% in compensation of top business executives while businesses are slashing wages, either by direct cuts or by not increasing wages with inflation, and stripping benefits is not just, fair, or ethical under any circumstance.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
and WAGES will go up too, resulting in people affording to support others livliehoods. when we had trade protection and a 60% unionized workforce in the 50s and 60s we saw a huge era of prosperity. the "trickle down economics" have succeeded in making the rich richer and richer with a shrinking middle class. before long we'll be living in a banana republic at this rate (and for the younger readers, banana republic in this context is not a store at the shopping mall)

and before you use the "class envy" and "class warfare" line, I don't care how you look at it, an increase of 800% in compensation of top business executives while businesses are slashing wages, either by direct cuts or by not increasing wages with inflation, and stripping benefits is not just, fair, or ethical under any circumstance.
Click to expand...

What is being proposed will actually make wages exceed current inflation - a basic guarantee of future inflation. Rinse and repeat.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
and WAGES will go up too, resulting in people affording to support others livliehoods. when we had trade protection and a 60% unionized workforce in the 50s and 60s we saw a huge era of prosperity. the "trickle down economics" have succeeded in making the rich richer and richer with a shrinking middle class. before long we'll be living in a banana republic at this rate (and for the younger readers, banana republic in this context is not a store at the shopping mall)
Click to expand...

Prices will go up, because wages go up. Not the other way around.

and before you use the "class envy" and "class warfare" line, I don't care how you look at it, an increase of 800% in compensation of top business executives while businesses are slashing wages, either by direct cuts or by not increasing wages with inflation, and stripping benefits is not just, fair, or ethical under any circumstance.
Click to expand...

Stop with the class envy! Stop waging class warfare!

I didn't have to bring it up. You did it for me. Ya see, it's as simple as this: Libbos don't give a rat's ass about the people. They only care about taking revenge on those people they hate. It never has anything to with the welfare of the country, or the people. If those big money CEO's were being compensated at a level that you agree with, you probably would be ok with the working class working for free.
 
apdst said:
Prices will go up, because wages go up. Not the other way around.



Stop with the class envy! Stop waging class warfare!

I didn't have to bring it up. You did it for me. Ya see, it's as simple as this: Libbos don't give a rat's ass about the people. They only care about taking revenge on those people they hate. It never has anything to with the welfare of the country, or the people. If those big money CEO's were being compensated at a level that you agree with, you probably would be ok with the working class working for free.
Click to expand...

What is never seen, although it is right before us and in plain sight, is that the added taxation of those providing goods/services is simply seen as another cost of sales and is then passed on to the consumer. That is the most regressive form of taxation imaginable.
 
apdst said:
Prices will go up, because wages go up. Not the other way around.



Stop with the class envy! Stop waging class warfare!

I didn't have to bring it up. You did it for me. Ya see, it's as simple as this: Libbos don't give a rat's ass about the people. They only care about taking revenge on those people they hate. It never has anything to with the welfare of the country, or the people. If those big money CEO's were being compensated at a level that you agree with, you probably would be ok with the working class working for free.
Click to expand...

Not true, and wage increases will not cause huge increases in price, in most industries labor is a small percentage of the total cost of producing a product. If labor is 10% of the cost of a 1 dollar burger for instance, the doubling the burger flippers wages will make the burger cost one dime extra. The mantra of "higher wages higher prices" may be technically true, but when you get into the details, price increases will not be dramatic
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Not true, and wage increases will not cause huge increases in price, in most industries labor is a small percentage of the total cost of producing a product. If labor is 10% of the cost of a 1 dollar burger for instance, the doubling the burger flippers wages will make the burger cost one dime extra. The mantra of "higher wages higher prices" may be technically true, but when you get into the details, price increases will not be dramatic
Click to expand...

That ignores the indirect labor costs incurred for each ingredient used to make that burger, the transportation of those ingredients to the store, the cost of utilities and the cost of physical plant support (e.g. store/equipment repair) services. That means that burger price will likely go up three times as much. A burger cost going up 3 dimes may make more folks bag their lunch and eat dinner in more often. Since this is only in Seattle, WA they may decide to shop more out of the city limits too.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Not true, and wage increases will not cause huge increases in price, in most industries labor is a small percentage of the total cost of producing a product. If labor is 10% of the cost of a 1 dollar burger for instance, the doubling the burger flippers wages will make the burger cost one dime extra. The mantra of "higher wages higher prices" may be technically true, but when you get into the details, price increases will not be dramatic
Click to expand...

That's completely wrong.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What is never seen, although it is right before us and in plain sight, is that the added taxation of those providing goods/services is simply seen as another cost of sales and is then passed on to the consumer. That is the most regressive form of taxation imaginable.
Click to expand...

What's sad, is the notion that ALL taxes are passed onto the consumer.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Not true, and wage increases will not cause huge increases in price, in most industries labor is a small percentage of the total cost of producing a product. If labor is 10% of the cost of a 1 dollar burger for instance, the doubling the burger flippers wages will make the burger cost one dime extra. The mantra of "higher wages higher prices" may be technically true, but when you get into the details, price increases will not be dramatic
Click to expand...
I would call roughly 30% 'dramatic'.

'Where It Went:
Cost of Food and Beverage Sales 31.9%
Salaries and Wages 29.4%
Restaurant Occupancy 7.7%'

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/291534/t288-nrarept2010.pdf Page 9
 
apdst said:
What's sad, is the notion that ALL taxes are passed onto the consumer.
Click to expand...

True. Something that many here refuse to acknowledge. That the consumer ends up paying for it all.
 
DA60 said:
I would call roughly 30% 'dramatic'.

'Where It Went:
Cost of Food and Beverage Sales 31.9%
Salaries and Wages 29.4%
Restaurant Occupancy 7.7%'

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/291534/t288-nrarept2010.pdf Page 9
Click to expand...

So doubling or tripling the cost of 31.9% of your industry cost? I don't see how Restaurants could possibly afford that hike in their costs, so they'd have to pass is along to the consumer. What does a consumer do when Restaurant prices are out of sight? He stays home and doesn't spend the money in Restaurants.

Yeah, I'm sure the Seattle Restaurants (and other businesses) are just loving this hair brained idea.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, but you claim that doubling the minimum wage will improve the economy. If so, $50 per hour will REALLY improve the economy, not to mention, we'll have more actual tax payers be introduced into the system.
Click to expand...

Great, I'm glad you agree it's fair to change someone's opinion and then attack that.
 
Deuce said:
Great, I'm glad you agree it's fair to change someone's opinion and then attack that.
Click to expand...

It's fair if it makes sense. You, unfortunately, didn't make a lick-a-sense.
 
eohrnberger said:
True. Something that many here refuse to acknowledge. That the consumer ends up paying for it all.
Click to expand...

Yes, if the consumer wants people to work a job to make whatever product or service is desired, they should be willing to properly fund someone actually being able to, you know, feed themselves on the compensation for that labor. So often we see the right-wingers put "living wage" in scare-quotes, as if it's some absurd notion that people working two full-time jobs ought to be able to feed themselves and pay rent.
 
apdst said:
It's fair if it makes sense. You, unfortunately, didn't make a lick-a-sense.
Click to expand...

It doesn't make sense to say liberals believe the minimum wage should go to $50/hour, nor does it make sense to say "if X is good, then 1000X must be 1000X better!" That's child-like logic you are displaying. You. Not me, or any other liberal on this message board. You invented the $50/hour minimum wage idea.

If it's good to eliminate some regulations, is it good to eliminate all regulations? Less regulation is good, right?
If it's good to cut taxes, is it good to cut all taxes?
If it's good to spend more on the military, is it good to spend twice as much on the military?
 
Deuce said:
Yes, if the consumer wants people to work a job to make whatever product or service is desired, they should be willing to properly fund someone actually being able to, you know, feed themselves on the compensation for that labor. So often we see the right-wingers put "living wage" in scare-quotes, as if it's some absurd notion that people working two full-time jobs ought to be able to feed themselves and pay rent.
Click to expand...

The value placed on the work rendered is not some sort of guarantee of being able to sustain yourself. The market places a value on the work rendered, by the value that is generated from that work, the number of people who would be willing to perform that work and how much compensation they would demand for doing so. In other words market competitive wages.

Distorting that with some sort of misguided idea that mandating a higher minimum wage, and not expecting the market to react in some other negative, more undesirable manner is not being realistic.

If you envision the market being an inflated balloon, and you poke it with your finger as a mandated higher minimum wage, the balloon, i.e. market, is going to bulge out in another place.

TANSTAAFLE = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. This also applies to minimum wage hikes. They aren't free either.

In the given discussion, it was observed:
DA60 said:
I would call roughly 30% 'dramatic'.

'Where It Went:
Cost of Food and Beverage Sales 31.9%
Salaries and Wages 29.4%
Restaurant Occupancy 7.7%'

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/291534/t288-nrarept2010.pdf Page 9
Click to expand...

If 31.9% of the cost structure of a business jumps by double or triple, there is little choice by the business than to increase their prices to customers by a compensating amount. People aren't going to pay it. They are going to eat at home. The Restaurant will go out of business. The result will be a net loss, potentially a significant one, of economic activity to the loss of everyone.

Surely you can the cause-effect chain here.
 
eohrnberger said:
The value placed on the work rendered is not some sort of guarantee of being able to sustain yourself. The market places a value on the work rendered, by the value that is generated from that work, the number of people who would be willing to perform that work and how much compensation they would demand for doing so. In other words market competitive wages.

Distorting that with some sort of misguided idea that mandating a higher minimum wage, and not expecting the market to react in some other negative, more undesirable manner is not being realistic.

If you envision the market being an inflated balloon, and you poke it with your finger as a mandated higher minimum wage, the balloon, i.e. market, is going to bulge out in another place.

TANSTAAFLE = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. This also applies to minimum wage hikes. They aren't free either.

In the given discussion, it was observed:


If 31.9% of the cost structure of a business jumps by double or triple, there is little choice by the business than to increase their prices to customers by a compensating amount. People aren't going to pay it. They are going to eat at home. The Restaurant will go out of business. The result will be a net loss, potentially a significant one, of economic activity to the loss of everyone.

Surely you can the cause-effect chain here.
Click to expand...

Restaurants are not going to go out of business.... Plus if you inject earned wealth into a class of people who don't make much they'll spend almost all of the increase, so with more dollars to spend the increases will be affordable. Also in Seattles case, if a downtown urban restaurant in a city with daytime population of over a million people has margins so thin that a 3 or 4 dollar bump in pay is going to break them then they haven't been running their business well for some time... Go visit any restaurant In downtown seattle between 8 am and 5 pm and tell me they're suffering..... There's no shortage of paying customers during the business day
 
Glen Contrarian said:
And what, exactly, do you have as experience in living in a high-cost city earning $10/hr? And what about as a parent?

And what you yourself are not factoring in is the fact that while initially there will be a higher cost to the corporations, the simple fact that the low-wage people have significantly more money to spend - and unlike rich people, poor people generally spend ALL their money every month - and because of that, the local businesses will prosper, and so will the corporations in turn.

If you want proof, just ask yourself why it is that low-wage red states generally have significantly higher poverty levels than higher-wage blue states. You're arguing against success, guy.
Click to expand...

thank you for not addressing the actual facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom