Breaking News: Restaurants Closing All Over Seattle As $15 Minimum Wage Mandate Starts April 1st.

[Camp]

Bogus OP and thread. One of the best examples ever of how people get tricked into believing nonsense. The restaurants in Seattle are not being effected with closures by the hourly wage law. 64 pages if debate and comments about a situation that doesn't even exist. A situation made up to promote a political viewpoint and honesty ignored.
Here is how the business community views the restaurant closings in Seattle, before the political agenda and disinformation is added by the hacks.

seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

 

[Geaux4it]

Minimum wage talk is a joke. To small of a demographic to impact the economy

-Geaux

 

[dblack]

Rarely are people paid what they are worth to our society. In fact, those that contribute the most, are often paid the least.

Very true. People are paid what the work they are doing is worth to the person who is paying them. I'd like to think we could all agree that a person's life is worth more than a paycheck.

 

[dblack]

Minimum wage talk is a joke. To small of a demographic to impact the economy

-Geaux

Well, that's thing. And it's what they'll never talk about. I'd like to see the federal minimum wage raised to $50.00/hr., just to shut these idiots up.

 

[dblack]

Minimum wage talk is a joke. To small of a demographic to impact the economy

-Geaux

Well, that's thing. And it's what they'll never talk about. I'd like to see the federal minimum wage raised to $50.00/hr., just to shut these idiots up.

Seriously, for those of you who really think minimum wage laws are beneficial, how do you think things would shake out with a substantial boost to the minimum? For the sake of argument, let's skip past whatever 'adjustments' would be necessary. Let's pretend there would be no job losses, no economic meltdown. How would things look five (ten, twenty) years after such a significant boost?

The burger flippers are now paid $50.00/hr. What is the manager paid?

 

[Geaux4it]

Minimum wage talk is a joke. To small of a demographic to impact the economy

-Geaux

Well, that's thing. And it's what they'll never talk about. I'd like to see the federal minimum wage raised to $50.00/hr., just to shut these idiots up.

Seriously, for those of you who really think minimum wage laws are beneficial, how do you think things would shake out with a substantial boost to the minimum? For the sake of argument, let's skip past whatever 'adjustments' would be necessary. Let's pretend there would be no job losses, no economic meltdown. How would things look five (ten, twenty) years after such a significant boost?

The burger flippers are now paid $50.00/hr. What is the manager paid?

Devalues the dollar

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

If you can't afford to pay you staff a living wage then you shouldn't be in business in the first place.

If we create tons of jobs, but they all pay a buck an hour, that doesn't help anyone but the capitalists who get rich paying jack-shit to their employees.

This risk is on the business owner, not the employee. And for accepting the risk, the employer sets the wage appropriate to the level of support desired. The business owner depends on employees, not he other way around.

The chicken and he egg need not apply here

-Geaux

 

[Flash]

So far not one of the $15 minimum wage supporter has refuted these numbers.

A small restaurant owner grosses $500,000 a year and
A) pays out 36% or $180,000 in wages/labor costs
B) pays out 30% or $150,000 in food
C) Pays out 30% or $150,000 for rent,utilities,permits, taxes,etc...
A total costs of $480,000 leaving
profit for the owner $20,000 net income...

BUT what happens if labor costs jump to 50% of the revenue or $250,000 BUT the revenue stays at $500,000?
Food costs stay the same... $150,000 so does other costs rent,etc. $150,000
Add Labor - $250,000
Add food - 150,000
Add Other - 150,000
Total $550,000

BUT WAIT... the gross revenue stayed the same $500,000.

Far from a profit of $20,000 the owner now because his labor costs jumped to 50% of revenue, has to make up out of OWN pocket, $50,000 in losses!
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see...hmmm no profit, but losses all because my labor costs go up.

Minimum wage supporters.. UNITE! Refute the above numbers!

Good analysis.

Either of two things happen:

Gross revenues stays the same because the business owner doesn't pass the increased labor consumer and soaks it up in profit. The problem with that is usually businesses employing minimum wages earners are low profit margin enterprises.

The increased in labor rates is passed on to the customers. This becomes a tax on the consumer. The consumer is not getting a better product for their money but is artificially paying more money because of filthy government regulations.

This is a great example of how out of control and corrupt our government is. The Liberals get elected by greedy special interest groups who repay the greedy by using the force of government to give them what the free market doesn't support.

Why in the hell did we ever give the filthy ass government the ability to set wages? What the hell were we thinking? That should never be a function of government. The free market should set labor rates. Stupid bureaucrats elected by greedy special interest groups should never have that power.

Great example of why we should never elect Liberals to government offices.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Great example of why we should never elect Liberals to government offices.

The conservatives call the Union "GREEDY"...lets look at the math...

As the New York Times notes, this is all you need to know about income inequality, in one comparison:

a few Finance sector employees earned, in bonuses, twice as much as All of the Minimum Wage Slaves in all of the United States, combined. It's a horrendously unequal distribution of the profits of Capitalism here in America.

 

[healthmyths]

Bogus OP and thread. One of the best examples ever of how people get tricked into believing nonsense. The restaurants in Seattle are not being effected with closures by the hourly wage law. 64 pages if debate and comments about a situation that doesn't even exist. A situation made up to promote a political viewpoint and honesty ignored.
Here is how the business community views the restaurant closings in Seattle, before the political agenda and disinformation is added by the hacks.

seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

So you dispute this will happen which is why 400 restaurants are closing in Seattle?
I am not sure you comprehend how businesses operate but here are the basic facts.

A small restaurant owner grosses $500,000 a year and to get these sales:
A) pays out 36% or $180,000 in wages/labor costs
B) pays out 30% or $150,000 in food
C) Pays out 30% or $150,000 for rent,utilities,permits, taxes,etc...
A total costs of $480,000 leaving

profit for the owner $20,000 net income...


BUT what happens if labor costs jump to 50% of the $500,000 gross revenue
Labor of $250,000
Food $150,000
other $150,000
Total $550,000
BUT WAIT... the gross revenue stayed the same $500,000.

Far from a profit of $20,000 the owner now because his labor costs jumped to 50% of revenue, has to make up out of OWN pocket, $50,000 in losses!
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what the owner sees no profit and worse the owner will have to pay OUT money!

Why is this so complicated?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

The $28.5 billion in bonuses doled out to Wall Street employees is double the annual pay for all 1,007,000 Americans who work full-time at the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Wall Street bonuses rose 3 percent last year, despite a 4.5 percent decline in industry profits

 

[Geaux4it]

The $28.5 billion in bonuses doled out to Wall Street employees is double the annual pay for all 1,007,000 Americans who work full-time at the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Wall Street bonuses rose 3 percent last year, despite a 4.5 percent decline in industry profits

 

[Skull Pilot]

Who makes minimum wage Pew Research Center


That group represents 4.3% of the nation’s 75.9 million hourly-paid workers and 2.6% of all wage and salary workers. In 1979, when the BLS began regularly studying minimum-wage workers, they represented 13.4% of hourly workers and 7.9% of all wage and salary workers. (Bear in mind that the 3.3 million figure doesn’t include salaried workers, although BLS says relatively few salaried workers are paid at what would translate into below-minimum hourly rates. Also, 23 states, as well as the District of Columbia, have higher minimum wages than the federal standard; people who earned the state minimum wage in those jurisdictions aren’t included in the 3.3 million total.)


People at or below the federal minimum are:

• Disproportionately young: 50.4% are ages 16 to 24; 24% are teenagers (ages 16 to 19).
• Mostly (77%) white; nearly half are white women.
• Largely part-time workers (64% of the total).

So you see it's not really a big deal

 

[Sonny Clark]

A "living wage" is one that allows a worker to be self-supporting, without the need for assistance, especially government assistance programs. Of course, it's different depending on where one lives. It cost more to live in New York City than it does to live in Jackson Mississippi.

That's correct. Then add in all the toys that certain people believe to be entitlements.
Luxury items such as high speed internet, pay tv, cell phones, the ability to eat out, a second car....Yeah.
According to a study out of MIT, the living wage for a family of 5 living in Los Angeles County is over $23 per hour...So if a guy who has few marketable skills gets a job in a fast food rest, the living wage activists will look to that number as wage that is "fair".....Somehow I don;'t see a fast food worker making that kind of money.
The point is, those who work these entry level jobs must be made to realize the emphasis is on entry level.

A "living wage" is NOT based on family size. A "living wage" is based what it takes for a "single" person to be self-supporting. It has nothing to do with family or family size.

Wow are you stupid.

A "living wage" is one that allows a worker to be self-supporting, without the need for assistance, especially government assistance programs. Of course, it's different depending on where one lives. It cost more to live in New York City than it does to live in Jackson Mississippi.

That's correct. Then add in all the toys that certain people believe to be entitlements.
Luxury items such as high speed internet, pay tv, cell phones, the ability to eat out, a second car....Yeah.
According to a study out of MIT, the living wage for a family of 5 living in Los Angeles County is over $23 per hour...So if a guy who has few marketable skills gets a job in a fast food rest, the living wage activists will look to that number as wage that is "fair".....Somehow I don;'t see a fast food worker making that kind of money.
The point is, those who work these entry level jobs must be made to realize the emphasis is on entry level.

A "living wage" is NOT based on family size. A "living wage" is based what it takes for a "single" person to be self-supporting. It has nothing to do with family or family size.

Wow....Your comment does not even rise to the level of stupid.
Here's egg on your face.
Living Wage Calculator-Introduction to the Living Wage Calculator

That's something entirely different from what I was talking about. Have you seen the ones that show what a single person needs in order to make a living wage? Of course not. You chose one that shows families, and not a single person, or an individual living wage. Do you think a living wage only applies to those married or that has a family? Why not check other data that shows individuals as well as families before calling someone stupid. I was only talking about one person, not entire families. And, calling me stupid does nothing to push your point. Why not try to be adult and civil in these conversations? Name calling and personal attacks is what kids do on the playground. Your age?

The site takes into account several family size variables.
The obfuscation is in your insistence that the issue of 'living wage' does not apply to families.
It most certainly does. At least according to the numerous calculators.
Look, at the end of the day no business owner is going to pay an unskilled entry level worker $600 per week( based on a 40 hr week). It's not going to happen.
It is simply not practical. And it is not sustainable
Business will always find ways around unfunded government mandates.

A living wage applies to all workers, whether single, married, or workers with families. But, My original comment was concerning a single person, not a family. There are data charts that show the living wage for different areas of the country, single workers, workers with families, etc. etc. - I did not list each category, sorry. I did NOT insist anything. I am well aware of the economic situation in this country regarding families, as well as single workers. Yes, businesses will do what they have to in order to retain cheap labor, as they are accustom to doing. They are not going to pay any more than they have to. I'm well aware of how the system works. I worked for over 40 years in many industries.

 

[Sonny Clark]

A "living wage" is one that allows a worker to be self-supporting, without the need for assistance, especially government assistance programs. Of course, it's different depending on where one lives. It cost more to live in New York City than it does to live in Jackson Mississippi.

That's correct. Then add in all the toys that certain people believe to be entitlements.
Luxury items such as high speed internet, pay tv, cell phones, the ability to eat out, a second car....Yeah.
According to a study out of MIT, the living wage for a family of 5 living in Los Angeles County is over $23 per hour...So if a guy who has few marketable skills gets a job in a fast food rest, the living wage activists will look to that number as wage that is "fair".....Somehow I don;'t see a fast food worker making that kind of money.
The point is, those who work these entry level jobs must be made to realize the emphasis is on entry level.

A "living wage" is NOT based on family size. A "living wage" is based what it takes for a "single" person to be self-supporting. It has nothing to do with family or family size.

Define "self supporting"....because if you're going to insist that a fast food worker has every right to live in an apartment that carries a monthly rent of $2k or $3k per month, you're nuts.
Because in places such as San Francisco, New York, Boston, Seattle, San Diego, Washington( Northwest/Georgetown) and many other places where housing costs are out of reach for everyone but the highest earners.

The term "self-supporting" speaks for itself. It means one can support themselves without the need for assistance. I wasn't talking about fast food workers, or any particular work place. I was talking about "a worker", a person that works. And, I certainly wasn't talking about the cost of apartments or rental property. Calling me nuts doesn't add anything to this conversation. Please make an effort to be adult and civil. Name calling and personal attack is what kids do on the playground. Yes, cost are different in many areas of the country, and I have already mentioned that if you'll go back and read my comments. Your age?

Then state your case.

I have already stated my opinion on the matter.

 

[Flash]

The $28.5 billion in bonuses doled out to Wall Street employees is double the annual pay for all 1,007,000 Americans who work full-time at the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Wall Street bonuses rose 3 percent last year, despite a 4.5 percent decline in industry profits

If you don't like executive bonuses paid for by corporations then don't buy anything made by the corporation. Problem solved you idiot.

The free market should determine the labor rates not some stupid ass bureaucrat elected by greedy special interest groups you dumbass.

If you want to make more money then go earn it. It is wrong to get the money through the thievery of government oppression.

 

[Iceweasel]

I am well aware of the economic situation in this country regarding families, as well as single workers. Yes, businesses will do what they have to in order to retain cheap labor, as they are accustom to doing. They are not going to pay any more than they have to. I'm well aware of how the system works. I worked for over 40 years in many industries.

That's a lie. There's no law (yet) that dictates pay raises but all businesses I know of have them. You get better at your job and can do more, they want you to stay, so they give you a raise. Simple stuff really.

 

[Sonny Clark]

I am well aware of the economic situation in this country regarding families, as well as single workers. Yes, businesses will do what they have to in order to retain cheap labor, as they are accustom to doing. They are not going to pay any more than they have to. I'm well aware of how the system works. I worked for over 40 years in many industries.

That's a lie. There's no law (yet) that dictates pay raises but all businesses I know of have them. You get better at your job and can do more, they want you to stay, so they give you a raise. Simple stuff really.

What's a lie? Where did I lie? I said absolutely nothing about "a law". Who are you addressing? I don't believe that I mentioned a law. What was the lie?

 

[zeke]

The free market should determine the labor rates

Yep the free market should encourage the free expression of unionism by freely allowing the minimum wage workers of the USA to freely join the International Organization of Minimum Wage Workers. Who will then freely negotiate the wage requirements of their members. And they won't be making MW anymore. And it will all be done in the :"free" markets.

Don't that sound like a good idea? With the union representing these workers, their labor will be worth more. To the laborers.

It is amazing what the free markers will allow.

 

[healthmyths]

Great example of why we should never elect Liberals to government offices.

The conservatives call the Union "GREEDY"...lets look at the math...

As the New York Times notes, this is all you need to know about income inequality, in one comparison:

a few Finance sector employees earned, in bonuses, twice as much as All of the Minimum Wage Slaves in all of the United States, combined. It's a horrendously unequal distribution of the profits of Capitalism here in America.

The $28.5 billion in bonuses doled out to Wall Street employees is double the annual pay for all 1,007,000 Americans who work full-time at the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. Wall Street bonuses rose 3 percent last year, despite a 4.5 percent decline in industry profits

PLUS you keep forgetting something that ignorant people like you that create this dissension and hatred of people that are successful.
A) $ 28.5 billion paid to these 165,200 people generated $6.2 billion in Federal taxes
B) Paid the state of New York at 6.65% on taxable income between $77,151 and $205,850,000 or $2.13 billion in state taxes

These evil wall street filthy executives PAID the State and Federal taxes of $8.3 billion.
These 1,007,000 workers at minimum wage paid NO taxes and at the same time received in Earned Income tax credit of $503 if they had no children.
or from $5.06 billion to $33.8 billion in EIC paid BACK to these workers If they had one qualifying child : $3,359
Federal government paid BACK to these 1,007,000 minimum wage from $5.06 billion to $33.8 billion plus the workers paid no taxes!

The REST of the story!!
Wall Street bonuses doubled income earned by all US minimum wage workers RT USA