Seattle's Minimum Wage Killed the 'Five-Dollar Footlong'

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

All wages are redistributive, I see you haven't taken even an Econ 100 class. This doesn't mean that it is communist.

The Princeton Article admits that it will lead to unemployment, so the purpose is not the help low-income workers. They will lose their jobs because of it. The purpose is to take from the employer.

 

[Montrovant]

Regressives continue to insist that hiking up the minimum wage to an artificial, arbitrary base, uprooting market forces doesn't have an affect on prices or an impact on jobs and reality continues to prove them wrong over and over again.

The sandwich chain recently resurrected the promotion in a national advertising campaign promising foot-long subs for just $4.99—but the special deal won't fly at one Subway restaurant in Seattle, where owner David Jones posted a sign this week giving customers the bad news.

Seattle's Minimum Wage Killed the 'Five-Dollar Footlong'

The biggest cost driver, as Jones' sign mentions, is Seattle's highest-in-the-nation minimum wage. It went from $9.47 to $11 per hour in 2015, then to $13 per hour in 2016, with a further increase to $15 per hour planned.

The result? According to researchers at the University of Washington's School of Public Policy and Governance, the number of hours worked in low-wage jobs has declined by around 9 percent since the start of 2016 "while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent." The net outcome: In 2016, the "higher" minimum wage actually lowered low-wage workers' earnings by an average of $125 a month.

Regressive tards will never get it through their heads that you can't draw blood from a stone.

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

That seems to be an argument against minimum wage entirely, would that be correct?

maybe. that wasn't the question so i didn't answer it with that in mind.

Actually, that was the first part of my question which you responded to: Do you disagree with minimum wage in general, or if not, what should govern where it is set?

Are you saying you think the government should set a minimum wage based on market value? Or that the market should decide on its own without government interference? I'm just trying to be clear on your points so that I don't respond to something you didn't mean.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

The market should govern the appropriate wage

 

[iceberg]

Regressives continue to insist that hiking up the minimum wage to an artificial, arbitrary base, uprooting market forces doesn't have an affect on prices or an impact on jobs and reality continues to prove them wrong over and over again.

The sandwich chain recently resurrected the promotion in a national advertising campaign promising foot-long subs for just $4.99—but the special deal won't fly at one Subway restaurant in Seattle, where owner David Jones posted a sign this week giving customers the bad news.

Seattle's Minimum Wage Killed the 'Five-Dollar Footlong'

The biggest cost driver, as Jones' sign mentions, is Seattle's highest-in-the-nation minimum wage. It went from $9.47 to $11 per hour in 2015, then to $13 per hour in 2016, with a further increase to $15 per hour planned.

The result? According to researchers at the University of Washington's School of Public Policy and Governance, the number of hours worked in low-wage jobs has declined by around 9 percent since the start of 2016 "while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent." The net outcome: In 2016, the "higher" minimum wage actually lowered low-wage workers' earnings by an average of $125 a month.

Regressive tards will never get it through their heads that you can't draw blood from a stone.

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

Automation aside.

Are you insinuating that an employee is always paid the value of what they produce? If so then why have a labor market at all? (You know, competitive labor markets that drive down the wages due to competition for landing a scarcity in this case, a job).

they're paid the value of what their employer can afford to pay that position to still make money for themselves and their business.

if i have a small business and need someone to run a cash register on saturdays and sundays for a total of 16 hours and the business i bring in during that time would mean i can only afford to pay someone $8 an hour to sit and watch the store, what are my options if i now must double their pay because i dared to hire anyone at all?

 

[Spycraft]

Regressives continue to insist that hiking up the minimum wage to an artificial, arbitrary base, uprooting market forces doesn't have an affect on prices or an impact on jobs and reality continues to prove them wrong over and over again.

The sandwich chain recently resurrected the promotion in a national advertising campaign promising foot-long subs for just $4.99—but the special deal won't fly at one Subway restaurant in Seattle, where owner David Jones posted a sign this week giving customers the bad news.

Seattle's Minimum Wage Killed the 'Five-Dollar Footlong'

The biggest cost driver, as Jones' sign mentions, is Seattle's highest-in-the-nation minimum wage. It went from $9.47 to $11 per hour in 2015, then to $13 per hour in 2016, with a further increase to $15 per hour planned.

The result? According to researchers at the University of Washington's School of Public Policy and Governance, the number of hours worked in low-wage jobs has declined by around 9 percent since the start of 2016 "while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent." The net outcome: In 2016, the "higher" minimum wage actually lowered low-wage workers' earnings by an average of $125 a month.

Regressive tards will never get it through their heads that you can't draw blood from a stone.

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

Automation aside.

Are you insinuating that an employee is always paid the value of what they produce? If so then why have a labor market at all? (You know, competitive labor markets that drive down the wages due to competition for landing a scarcity in this case, a job).

they're paid the value of what their employer can afford to pay that position to still make money for themselves and their business.

if i have a small business and need someone to run a cash register on saturdays and sundays for a total of 16 hours and the business i bring in during that time would mean i can only afford to pay someone $8 an hour to sit and watch the store, what are my options if i now must double their pay because i dared to hire anyone at all?

That's not true.

I suggest you learn what a "labor market" is.

An employer shops in a labor market for the lowest wages possible, laborers in that market lower the wages as much as each can tolerate in a bidding-contest for that job.

This balancing act can overly-favor the employer if they have a large pool and political power.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

Tell that to the Subway franchise owner and all the other employees in Seattle who have had their hours cut.

 

[iceberg]

Regressives continue to insist that hiking up the minimum wage to an artificial, arbitrary base, uprooting market forces doesn't have an affect on prices or an impact on jobs and reality continues to prove them wrong over and over again.

Regressive tards will never get it through their heads that you can't draw blood from a stone.

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

That seems to be an argument against minimum wage entirely, would that be correct?

maybe. that wasn't the question so i didn't answer it with that in mind.

Actually, that was the first part of my question which you responded to: Do you disagree with minimum wage in general, or if not, what should govern where it is set?

Are you saying you think the government should set a minimum wage based on market value? Or that the market should decide on its own without government interference? I'm just trying to be clear on your points so that I don't respond to something you didn't mean.

tough question. is minimum the ONLY wage I can pay? can i pay less for part time labor? i don't think there's 1 good answer to this unfortunately. small business owners simply may not be able to afford to pay $15 for a role in their company. so what are their options at that point? raise prices? move to lower rent neighborhoods?

i do think there needs to be a baseline but i don't believe it's a one size fits all.

 

[Spycraft]

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

The market should govern the appropriate wage

The market can be abused by cartels and those with political power such that they can artificially reduce wages to slave wages.

 

[iceberg]

Regressives continue to insist that hiking up the minimum wage to an artificial, arbitrary base, uprooting market forces doesn't have an affect on prices or an impact on jobs and reality continues to prove them wrong over and over again.

Regressive tards will never get it through their heads that you can't draw blood from a stone.

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

Automation aside.

Are you insinuating that an employee is always paid the value of what they produce? If so then why have a labor market at all? (You know, competitive labor markets that drive down the wages due to competition for landing a scarcity in this case, a job).

they're paid the value of what their employer can afford to pay that position to still make money for themselves and their business.

if i have a small business and need someone to run a cash register on saturdays and sundays for a total of 16 hours and the business i bring in during that time would mean i can only afford to pay someone $8 an hour to sit and watch the store, what are my options if i now must double their pay because i dared to hire anyone at all?

That's not true.

I suggest you learn what a "labor market" is.

An employer shops in a labor market for the lowest wages possible, laborers in that market lower the wages as much as each can tolerate in a bidding-contest for that job.

This balancing act can overly-favor the employer if they have a large pool and political power.

great. then answer my question that as a small business owner and this is all i can afford to pay someone to manage say my book store on the weekends, you're giving me no option other than $15 an hour. you're reaching to punish the man and great. you do that. but that isn't my focus - this hammering on the business owners cause they all happen to be greedy or something.

 

[Spycraft]

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

Tell that to the Subway franchise owner and all the other employees in Seattle who have had their hours cut.

But they don't have to work as many hours for the same rate of pay they were making before their wages went up.

So it balances out, and I'd rather work fewer hours and be paid the same, than work more hours and be paid the same.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I had a 5 dollar Black Forest Ham sub for lunch yesterday. Good stuff

 

[Spycraft]

I'm not defending the Seattle minimum wage, but do you disagree with minimum wage in general? If not, what do you think should govern where it is set?

market value.

fast food is not a skill position. it's manual labor and not worth the $$$. these positions will be automated and then done away with for people to even have it as an option. then what?

what you can do skillswise will determine what you should be able to make in life. not that you exist, squirted out 6 kids and need to feed them.

Automation aside.

Are you insinuating that an employee is always paid the value of what they produce? If so then why have a labor market at all? (You know, competitive labor markets that drive down the wages due to competition for landing a scarcity in this case, a job).

they're paid the value of what their employer can afford to pay that position to still make money for themselves and their business.

if i have a small business and need someone to run a cash register on saturdays and sundays for a total of 16 hours and the business i bring in during that time would mean i can only afford to pay someone $8 an hour to sit and watch the store, what are my options if i now must double their pay because i dared to hire anyone at all?

That's not true.

I suggest you learn what a "labor market" is.

An employer shops in a labor market for the lowest wages possible, laborers in that market lower the wages as much as each can tolerate in a bidding-contest for that job.

This balancing act can overly-favor the employer if they have a large pool and political power.

great. then answer my question that as a small business owner and this is all i can afford to pay someone to manage say my book store on the weekends, you're giving me no option other than $15 an hour. you're reaching to punish the man and great. you do that. but that isn't my focus - this hammering on the business owners cause they all happen to be greedy or something.

Then you'd only be able to afford to hire someone who will settle for the amount you can afford.

But you're overlooking that when wages go up, people spend more, so you'll be able to charge more for that soda.

There's an optimum where wages go up, raising consumption activity level, thereby offsetting any potential inflation and any potential loss of employment.

 

[Spycraft]

I had a 5 dollar Black Forest Ham sub for lunch yesterday. Good stuff

You could buy a whole hamhock for $8bucks.

 

[depotoo]

Try this latest one.
Minimum Wage Increases, Wages, and Low-Wage Employment: Evidence from Seattle
https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/files/NBER Working Paper.pdf
And this one

http://montgomerycountymd.gov/OPI/Resources/Files/2017/MC_Minimum-Wage-Impact-Analysis_7-31-2017.pdf

And for you to not understand that yes, newer studies on the actual REsULTS of these increases is much more reliable than one many years old

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

6 years old... lol

Will you idiots get on the same page.

The other buffoon just threw at me a paper bereft of mathematical proofs from 1968.

So which is it?

Philosophically I'm wrong despite any mathematical evidence to back up your claim?

Or the paper is too old? LOLOLOLOL

 

[DrLove]

Reminds me a little of The Pizza Turd.

John Schnatter, CEO and founder of pizza chain Papa John’s, took a critical look at President Obama‘s Affordable Care Act recently, warning that the legislation will result in price increases for pizza.

The law changes that go into effect in 2014, he said, will increase the company’s costs — and those increases will be passed on to consumers. “Our best estimate is that the Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents per pizza, or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis,” said Schnatter, who is a Mitt Romney supporter (and fundraiser).​

By the By: David Jones is an unabashed Trumpling and RWNJ. But I suppose if he is an independent franchise owner, he can choose not to participate and lose customers. That's the American way! But he should know that loss leader promotions WORK. And for the record .. Subway sucks and isn't "Eating Fresh".

The rise and fall of Subway, the world's biggest food chain

 

[Spycraft]

Reminds me a little of The Pizza Turd.

John Schnatter, CEO and founder of pizza chain Papa John’s, took a critical look at President Obama‘s Affordable Care Act recently, warning that the legislation will result in price increases for pizza.

The law changes that go into effect in 2014, he said, will increase the company’s costs — and those increases will be passed on to consumers. “Our best estimate is that the Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents per pizza, or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis,” said Schnatter, who is a Mitt Romney supporter (and fundraiser).​

By the By: David Jones is an unabashed Trumpling and RWNJ. But I suppose if he is an independent franchise owner, he can choose not to participate and lose customers. That's the American way! But he should know that loss leader promotions WORK. And for the record .. Subway sucks and isn't "Eating Fresh".

The rise and fall of Subway, the world's biggest food chain

Wait a fucking minute.

This asshole admits their pizzas only used to cost 14 cents per pizza?

"from a corporate basis"?

They fucking charge like $20 a pizza! Americans are fucking dumb for paying for things way over the value they actually cost to make.

 

[depotoo]

Dang, though your image isn’t showing.

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

6 years old... lol

Will you idiots get on the same page.

The other buffoon just threw at me a paper bereft of mathematical proofs from 1968.

So which is it?

Philosophically I'm wrong despite any mathematical evidence to back up your claim?

Or the paper is too old? LOLOLOLOL

Here's some advise, Sock.

 

[westwall]

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

Here's one from the University of Chicago School of Economics.
https://miltonfriedman.hoover.org/friedman_images/Collections/2016c21/NW_09_26_1966.pdf

Milton Friedman is a theorist who never had to quantitatively demonstrate the outcomes of his theories.

To demonstrate my statement: There's no mathematics what-so-ever in the paper you cited.

That makes the paper "theory" and "philosophy".

Not Economics and mathematical proofs.

There's an old saying, "those who can, do, those who can't, teach". This applies well in this case. You choose to believe the results of a Princeton study, while ignoring the real world experience of the workers in Seattle. Who to believe, a work of theory.....or the actual real world experience of those affected by the law.

I'll go with real world over theory any day of the week.

 

[Spycraft]

Try this latest one.
Minimum Wage Increases, Wages, and Low-Wage Employment: Evidence from Seattle
https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/files/NBER Working Paper.pdf
And this one

http://montgomerycountymd.gov/OPI/Resources/Files/2017/MC_Minimum-Wage-Impact-Analysis_7-31-2017.pdf

And for you to not understand that yes, newer studies on the actual REsULTS of these increases is much more reliable than one many years old

Trump went to the best schools. So here's a paper from one of the best schools about what an idiot you are.

http://www.princeton.edu/~davidlee/wp/lee-saez11optminwage_jpubeR2.pdf

6 years old... lol

Will you idiots get on the same page.

The other buffoon just threw at me a paper bereft of mathematical proofs from 1968.

So which is it?

Philosophically I'm wrong despite any mathematical evidence to back up your claim?

Or the paper is too old? LOLOLOLOL

"This paper evaluates the wage, employment, and hours effects of the first and second phase-in of the Seattle Minimum Wage Ordinance, which raised the minimum wage from $9.47 to as much as $11 per hour in 2015 and to as much as $13 per hour in 2016. Using a variety of methods to analyze employment in all sectors paying below a specified real hourly rate, we conclude that the second wage increase to $13 reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by around 9 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent. Consequently, total payroll fell for such jobs, implying that the minimum wage ordinance lowered low-wage employees’ earnings by an average of $125 per month in 2016. Evidence attributes more modest effects to the first wage increase. We estimate an effect of zero when analyzing employment in the restaurant industry at all wage levels, comparable to many prior studies."

This paper sounds stupid: "hours decreased by 9%" but "hourly wages increased only 3%"

How is that possible when the wage increase was from $11/hour to $13/hour. An increase of 16%?

Laughable paper.

 

[Mr Natural]

So how much is a five dollar foot long now in Seattle?