Chick-fil-A restaurant in CA will pay employees $17 an hour

[hadit]

Thanks Received:
773
Your, accepted dogma must be wrong. Or, there is some other factor involved.

strike three.
.
You can't explain the lower than national average unemployment rate for those two jurisdictions with a higher than average minimum wage.
Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Explain your dogma.
Click to expand...
Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium.

Capitalism explains why more people are looking for work at that price point.
Click to expand...
Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium.

In economics, a monopsony is a market structure in which only one buyer interacts with many would-be sellers of a particular product.

One (or a few) buyer(s) explains why a higher MW doesn't decrease demand for labor?

Dude!!

You get funnier by the post.
Click to expand...
A statutory minimum wage makes, illegals out of "cheap employers".

Merely fixing a Bad moral Standard, for less fortunate illegals, is all they do.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.
Click to expand...
Dude!

Examples of a Monopsony
Monopsonies take many different forms, but they most commonly occur when a single employer controls an entire labor market. When this happens, the sellers, in this case the potential employees, compete for the few jobs available by accepting lower wages, which drives down employee costs for the business.



Read more: Monopsony Monopsony
Click to expand...
The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

The left has results, not excuses. Only the right wing does that, by custom and habit, until it is indistinguishable from any moral.
lol. You did not rebut these in any way. Nothing but diversion is all you have.

Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium. The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Capitalism explains why more people are looking for work at that price point.

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

Outlawing cheaper labor didn't buy up the labor, it kept the labor unemployed.​

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Oooh! Oooh! I know! Since demand for labor rises as its cost rises and increasing the MW doesn't have any negative effects on employment, let's set the MW at $100/hr and eliminate poverty all together.

 

[danielpalos]

Thanks Received:
773
Your, accepted dogma must be wrong. Or, there is some other factor involved.

strike three.
.
You can't explain the lower than national average unemployment rate for those two jurisdictions with a higher than average minimum wage.
Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Explain your dogma.
Click to expand...
Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium.

Capitalism explains why more people are looking for work at that price point.
Click to expand...
Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium.

In economics, a monopsony is a market structure in which only one buyer interacts with many would-be sellers of a particular product.

One (or a few) buyer(s) explains why a higher MW doesn't decrease demand for labor?

Dude!!

You get funnier by the post.
Click to expand...
A statutory minimum wage makes, illegals out of "cheap employers".

Merely fixing a Bad moral Standard, for less fortunate illegals, is all they do.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.
Click to expand...
Dude!

Examples of a Monopsony
Monopsonies take many different forms, but they most commonly occur when a single employer controls an entire labor market. When this happens, the sellers, in this case the potential employees, compete for the few jobs available by accepting lower wages, which drives down employee costs for the business.



Read more: Monopsony Monopsony
Click to expand...
The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

The left has results, not excuses. Only the right wing does that, by custom and habit, until it is indistinguishable from any moral.
lol. You did not rebut these in any way. Nothing but diversion is all you have.

Monopsony explains why there is a lower unemployment rate at the new equilibrium. The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Capitalism explains why more people are looking for work at that price point.

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

Outlawing cheaper labor didn't buy up the labor, it kept the labor unemployed.​

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Yes, when monopsony applies and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

 

[danielpalos]

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

Outlawing cheaper labor didn't buy up the labor, it kept the labor unemployed.​

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Oooh! Oooh! I know! Since demand for labor rises as its cost rises and increasing the MW doesn't have any negative effects on employment, let's set the MW at $100/hr and eliminate poverty all together.

set the tax rate to zero, first right wingers.

 

[OnePercenter]

Employers aren't going to give raises unless they're made too.

You're lying.

That's what tRumps US Department of Labor says.

From May 2017 to May 2018, real average hourly earnings decreased 0.1 percent

Real Earnings Summary

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

US Department of Labor says.

They said that "Employers aren't going to give raises unless they're made too"?
You're lying.
Thanks for the link.

View attachment 200884

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.
What government regulation forced them to do that?

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

Which one? Link?

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That Concept, applies. Government simply "co-opts" any wages lower than the statutory minimum wage and "acts like a single employer who bought up all labor cheaper than the minimum wage."

Outlawing cheaper labor didn't buy up the labor, it kept the labor unemployed.​

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Yes, when monopsony applies and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

Yes, when monopsony applies

Huh? Try again, in English.

and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Pricing sellers out of the market reduces employment.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You're lying.

That's what tRumps US Department of Labor says.

From May 2017 to May 2018, real average hourly earnings decreased 0.1 percent

Real Earnings Summary

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

US Department of Labor says.

They said that "Employers aren't going to give raises unless they're made too"?
You're lying.
Thanks for the link.

View attachment 200884

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.
What government regulation forced them to do that?

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

Which one? Link?

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

 

[hadit]

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Oooh! Oooh! I know! Since demand for labor rises as its cost rises and increasing the MW doesn't have any negative effects on employment, let's set the MW at $100/hr and eliminate poverty all together.

set the tax rate to zero, first right wingers.

We're not talking about the tax rate, are we? Answer the question honestly.

 

[OnePercenter]

That's what tRumps US Department of Labor says.

Real Earnings Summary

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

US Department of Labor says.

They said that "Employers aren't going to give raises unless they're made too"?
You're lying.
Thanks for the link.

View attachment 200884

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.
What government regulation forced them to do that?

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

Which one? Link?

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

US Department of Labor says.

They said that "Employers aren't going to give raises unless they're made too"?
You're lying.
Thanks for the link.

View attachment 200884

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.
What government regulation forced them to do that?

Chicks $17.00/hr was due to regulation.

Which one? Link?

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

Sure......right after you explain how hourly earnings increased without government forcing
corporations to give raises. Like you claimed.

 

[danielpalos]

You still can't explain Seattle and San Francisco, right wingers. Fallacy is all you seem to have.

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Yes, when monopsony applies and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

Yes, when monopsony applies

Huh? Try again, in English.

and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Pricing sellers out of the market reduces employment.

Monopsony applies. And why is there a lower unemployment rate not a higher unemployment rate if what you claim reduces employment?

Seattle and San Francisco are two examples you cannot explain, right wingers. why is the unemployment rate Lower, with a Higher minimum wage?

 

[danielpalos]

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Oooh! Oooh! I know! Since demand for labor rises as its cost rises and increasing the MW doesn't have any negative effects on employment, let's set the MW at $100/hr and eliminate poverty all together.

set the tax rate to zero, first right wingers.

We're not talking about the tax rate, are we? Answer the question honestly.

it is about special pleading.

 

[danielpalos]

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

Sure......right after you explain how hourly earnings increased without government forcing
corporations to give raises. Like you claimed.

means nothing if the right wing is going to whine about the poor not paying enough in taxes.

 

[OnePercenter]

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year, AND if you factor in inflation, the number at the end of the year is actually less. Why are you so against the middle class making a living wage? A tRump/Putin manifesto?

If you read the orginal link you will find out why the operator increased pay.

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

Sure......right after you explain how hourly earnings increased without government forcing
corporations to give raises. Like you claimed.

That's the entire point of the thread. The chick operator increase wages to get ahead of the minimum wage curve.

Now, factor in inflation.

 

[danielpalos]

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

Sure......right after you explain how hourly earnings increased without government forcing
corporations to give raises. Like you claimed.

That's the entire point of the thread. The chick operator increase wages to get ahead of the minimum wage curve.

Now, factor in inflation.

the dollar menu still won't double.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Employers at these fast food outlets have fewer employees so they can afford to pay more. The newer Chick fil As have no dining rooms nor restrooms. There are four employees. One for the walk up window. One for the drive up window
Two for the kitchen. Of course they can pay more. No customer can get inside the building. There is only outdoor patio seating. The tables and chairs are bolted to the concrete.

It's the future.

Bullshit. Been to Chick-Fil-A, all had dining rooms and rest rooms.

 

[Jarlaxle]

lol you don't know jack shit; you're just another parrot.

No, $17 an hour is, dumbass. See, you're too stupid to get by without somebody holding your hand.

lol you don't know jack shit

I know more than you......low bar, admittedly.


No, $17 an hour is, dumbass

Hey, fucktard, it you only add $10 an hour in value, you won't get hired at $17 an hour, you'll be unemployed

at $0 an hour.

Oh pipe down, troll; you're just another spammer with an agenda, and an especially dumb one at that. You know nothing about business or labor costs, period, and you know squat about 'adding value' to anything. You don't even know how to fill out those 1040 EZ's you have HR Block do for you every year. You just take their word for it what you owe.

Anybody who can't pay $17 an hour isn't doing enough business to hire anybody in the first place. IT's either a glutted market, or one of no real value to anybody. That's all there is to it.

Let me guess. You've never had to make a payroll, have you?

If you do it correctly it isn't an issue.

Being adequately financed, know who to hire (which can be farmed out), and NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, hire relatives.

And never, ever, face an economic slump that drives down demand, and never, ever, have a big contact cancelled right before you start on it, and never, ever, have truckers go on strike so you can't get inventory.

Should I go on?

The bottom line is, there are factors out of your control that cause layoffs.

My wife got laid off because the place where she worked burned down.

 

[Jarlaxle]

That's 22 points higher than yours. Go ahead and show us how much $17 an hour is going to add to the average fast food order at any store with a decent business.. We'll wait. Well, maybe not for Todster, since he has no idea what the question even means.

Go ahead and show us how much $17 an hour is going to add to the average fast food order at any store with a decent business..

Sounds like an interesting exercise.
You should definitely open a fast food restaurant, pay all your employees at least $17/hour and be
sure to post your results here. Your food will probably be cheaper than all your competitors, and your profits higher, because you're such an economics wiz.

We have metrics from establishments that passed on that cost via a surcharge.

No where near what right wing hearsayers and right wing soothsayers claim.

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour. The cheapest order is around $1, or 11%, with a drink $2, or 5.5%, a regular breakfast meal at $4 or so, 2.75 %, etc., etc, etc. That Big giant increase in burgers?Well, a Big Mc meal is what, now, $6 or so? 1.8%

At the average McDonalds', it would add in the neighbor hood of 11 cents per order to raise the wages from $7.25 to $17 an hour.

An extra 975 cents per employee per hour would be paid for by 11 cents per order?
That would mean 89 orders per hour per employee. How many employees? 7? More?
I don't think your numbers add up.

View attachment 200314
Owning a McDonald’s Franchise: Purchase Cost vs. Annual Profit

Assuming "Crew Payroll" is the minimum wage employees, 17/7.25=2.345,
2.345 x 540,000 = 1,266,207. An increase of 726k.
726000/2700000(net sales) = 27%.

You think 11 cents an order is 27%? DERP!

Keep talking out of your ass, it's amusing.

Since I'm qualified to, and have seen the ACTUAL numbers, I'll help you with the actual's.

McDonalds make 700-900% profit on every item they sell.

Cost of food and paper goods is $400.000.00

Gross profit is $2,300,000.00

Profit after controllable's is $1.4M. Maintenance and repair are cover under the lease. Linen is covered under food and paper costs.

Total operating income is actually $905K. Depreciation and amortization is removed because everything is leased.

You're adorable.

One more time: typical profit from a McD's franchise is about 4%.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As soon as you answer the questions you ran from....

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

….I'll be happy to explain Seattle and San Francisco

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Yes, when monopsony applies and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

Yes, when monopsony applies

Huh? Try again, in English.

and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Pricing sellers out of the market reduces employment.

Monopsony applies. And why is there a lower unemployment rate not a higher unemployment rate if what you claim reduces employment?

Seattle and San Francisco are two examples you cannot explain, right wingers. why is the unemployment rate Lower, with a Higher minimum wage?

Monopsony applies.

Monopsony applies when the only company in town drives down wages.
Who is this single company in San Francisco and Seattle?

While you're Googling for your answer...…..

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

According to YOUR LINK, the REAL hourly pay hasn't gone up in at least one year,

Why would you bring up REAL pay?
You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Why would you bring up REAL pay?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

You think corporations don't give raises unless they're forced.
When did government force them in the last year? Link?

Americans received raises?

Why would I bring up actual numbers?

Actual numbers? LOL!

Do you get paid in real dollars or in current dollars?

Americans received raises?

Your own link showed they did.

Average hourly earnings increased from $26.21 in May 2017 to $26.92 in May 2018.

Now factor in inflation.

Sure......right after you explain how hourly earnings increased without government forcing
corporations to give raises. Like you claimed.

That's the entire point of the thread. The chick operator increase wages to get ahead of the minimum wage curve.

Now, factor in inflation.

The chick operator increase wages to get ahead of the minimum wage curve.

Get ahead? So you agree he wasn't forced. That shouldn't have taken you this long to realize.

 

[danielpalos]

Reading comprehension helps.

The economic factor is that there are no, lawful buyers for less than the minimum wage; a de jure, monopsony.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?

Yes, when monopsony applies and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

Yes, when monopsony applies

Huh? Try again, in English.

and there are no lawful buyers for less than the nominal wage.

Pricing sellers out of the market reduces employment.

Monopsony applies. And why is there a lower unemployment rate not a higher unemployment rate if what you claim reduces employment?

Seattle and San Francisco are two examples you cannot explain, right wingers. why is the unemployment rate Lower, with a Higher minimum wage?

Monopsony applies.

Monopsony applies when the only company in town drives down wages.
Who is this single company in San Francisco and Seattle?

While you're Googling for your answer...…..

Is there more demand for unskilled labor at $7.25/hour or at $15/hour?
What about at $20/hour? $30/hour?​

Government. It happens by Jurisdiction. A statutory Minimum Wage functions the same by analogy.

Government simply "criminalizes" any wage below the minimum wage. In effect, Government is the procurer of labor below the minimum wage. There can be No market below that wage, by law.