So Much For High Minimum Wage Destroying Jobs

[Dana7360]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

See you are making a fool out of yourself, Seattle new minimum wage law kicks in stages, $15 for large companys in 4 years, small companys in 7 years, go back to eating lead paint.

As it is if you bother to read the news, one resterauant, got rid of tips and imediately went to $15 bucks an hour while raising it's prices up 21%

Your problem is that you didn't read my post very well.

As I said, the minimum wage in Seattle is 10.32 an hour. The federal minimum wage is 7 something an hour. If high minimum wage kills jobs then why is the unemployment rate in King county only 3.3%?

The only place that it's 15 dollars an hour is in the city of Seatac which is in King County.

You're going to have to show some proof that one restaurant went to a flat 15 dollars an hour when the law doesn't require it yet. You're going to have to prove to me that one restaurant elected to pay their employees 15 dollars an hour instead of the legal 2.30 an hour plus tips.

Here's a clue, the new law says that if the employee makes tips the employer doesn't have to raise the wages to 15 an hour. You're going to have to prove to me that one restaurant elected to pay 15 an hour and remove one of it's few avenues to only pay 2.30 an hour so that they will pay 15 an hour. You're going to have to prove to me that one restaurant elected to not let the customers pay tips so that the employer can pay more in wages.

Stop lying.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

That is PART of the problem. The other part is the combination of a high number of under-educated and unskilled people who expect yo be paid a living wage while providing no measurable benefit to their employer and over-educated individuals who think their Masters Degree in Communications from Ha-vud somehow entitles them to a 6 figure income despite having no meaningful work skills.

IMO - that is an oversimplification.
After NAFTA, industry robotic advances, computerization and massive consolidation layoffs - there are simply much less jobs available for all levels/types of employees.
In any successful economy to reach it's potential there MUST be good jobs for the masses. We had that post WWII thru the mid 1970's. Indeed the golden era for the middle class.
By the 1980's America switched to a "debt as income" model. Whereby nearly every American family of all incomes were spending more than they made.This created a false economy that helped alleviate the post 70's decline.
As I have said 1000 times here and everywhere - UNDEREMPLOYMENT is a far-far greater problem in America than unemployment.
There are simply not enough good paying jobs for the number of available job seekers.
This is an incredibly difficult problem to fix - if possible at all. So the Democrats in their infinite wisdom, know they cannot solve the real problem - nor are they particularly interested in trying to - much easier to create victimization and corral the base into blaming the Republicans on something else to distract them from reality - minimum wage yeah! We need to raise it but evil Republicans won't! They hate the poor!!
Damn Republicans!!

 

[JoeMoma]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

$15.00 an hour is barely a living wage, if at all; self-sufficiency in most states is $25.00 an hour.

NEWSFLASH ! Minimum wage was never intended to be a "living wage".

Because you said so? A 40 hour work week should earn a person a livable wage and in case you haven`t noticed, the elites have been taking the good jobs out of this country for the past 30 years or so. It`s tough to compete with people making $2 an hour.

Define living wage. Compared to most people throughout history, a person earning today's minimum wage is living in luxury.

 

[Anathema]

UNDEREMPLOYMENT is a far-far greater problem in America than unemployment.

There are simply not enough good paying jobs for the number of available job seekers......

Underemployment is largely a matter of individuals who don't want to put in the time, energy, and focus. The jobs would be there if the society put enough emphasis on FORCE these people to join society and become productive members of it.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

High five, Dana.

 

[Darkwind]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

$15.00 an hour is barely a living wage, if at all; self-sufficiency in most states is $25.00 an hour.

NEWSFLASH ! Minimum wage was never intended to be a "living wage".

You don't understand. You don't get repeat customers by selling them talcum powder UNTIL after you have hooked them on the hard stuff.

 

[charwin95]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

See you are making a fool out of yourself, Seattle new minimum wage law kicks in stages, $15 for large companys in 4 years, small companys in 7 years, go back to eating lead paint.

As it is if you bother to read the news, one resterauant, got rid of tips and imediately went to $15 bucks an hour while raising it's prices up 21%

I have several relatives all over Seattle one family own a restaurant business along Alaskan Way. Tell me the name of this restaurant that you are talking about and I will get someone to check it out. I'm waiting.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Underemployment is largely a matter of individuals who don't want to put in the time, energy, and focus. The jobs would be there if the society put enough emphasis on FORCE these people to join society and become productive members of it.

That doesn't create jobs. And again, just sayin, is an oversimplification.
There are already waaaayyyy too many people going to college today than should be. Colleges are at least 60% over populated.
There are too many people whose poverty is not a lack of money - it is a lack of opportunity. And it is getting worse. The painfully slow "recovery" since 2008 - most new job creation is low paying/part-time.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

$15.00 an hour is barely a living wage, if at all; self-sufficiency in most states is $25.00 an hour.

NEWSFLASH ! Minimum wage was never intended to be a "living wage".

Because you said so? A 40 hour work week should earn a person a livable wage and in case you haven`t noticed, the elites have been taking the good jobs out of this country for the past 30 years or so. It`s tough to compete with people making $2 an hour.

I could live as good on $10 bucks an hour as I do on making $75,000 a year. Just by less Crap I don't need, dump the cell phone Bill, don't use A/C etc...etc... You ever here of thrift stores and coupons ?

There is some truth to that.
Back when I was a youngster you didnt have a cell phone bill and most people didnt have cable and you damn sure didnt have satellite radio.

 

[Dana7360]

How many posts have there been saying that Seattle would lose jobs since wages were raised to $10.32 an hour in April?

The rest of the state has a minimum wage of 9.32 with the exception of the city of Seatac where the minimum wage is 15.00 an hour. Seatac is in King county.

How many posts are there saying high minimum wage kills jobs?

If that were true then Seattle, the King, Snohomish counties would be seeing high unemployment.

Which has not happened.

Instead in King County, where Seattle is, the unemployment rate is 3.3%. In Snohomish County the unemployment rate is 3.6%

So while conservatives scream about high wages destroying jobs, the facts prove the exact opposite.
Map of County Unemployment Rates

High five, Dana.

Thank you NoTea.

These people need to see the honest facts but sadly they ignore it when it's presented to them.

They don't want the truth.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

I agree with pretty much all of that.
But I do not agree that minimum wage should necessarily be raised.
As I have posted in this thread 5 or 6 times now...part-time, min. wage jobs are not suppose to support one person let alone a family. It is not supposed to be "living wages".
The real problem in our economy is there is not enough basic jobs for the masses.
What is a basic job? Full time unskilled and skilled labor.
Labor has been dramatically cheapened over the past 30 years, and there has been no replacement for 100,000's lost good paying jobs except part-time low wage service jobs to which the President loves to brag about.
I don;t know what the answer is. I do not believe labor will return anytime in the near future if ever.
Welcome to a corporatized world economy. Exactly what Ross Perot said would happen.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

I agree with pretty much all of that.
But I do not agree that minimum wage should necessarily be raised.
As I have posted in this thread 5 or 6 times now...part-time, min. wage jobs are not suppose to support one person let alone a family. It is not supposed to be "living wages".
The real problem in our economy is there is not enough basic jobs for the masses.
What is a basic job? Full time unskilled and skilled labor.
Labor has been dramatically cheapened over the past 30 years, and there has been no replacement for 100,000's lost good paying jobs except part-time low wage service jobs to which the President loves to brag about.
I don;t know what the answer is. I do not believe labor will return anytime in the near future if ever.
Welcome to a corporatized world economy. Exactly what Ross Perot said would happen.

Starving consumers of a living wage is a moronic shortsighted greed based approach to the economy.

In essence it reverses the hard work of the entire last century to improve the living standards for everyone in America. Those same living standards are what made America the economic power that it became.

The current greed based strip mining of the middle class wealth into the hands of a tiny obsessed bunch of powerful misers is going to have negative consequences for this nation and it is diametrically opposed to the Constitutional principles upon which this nation was founded.

What is happening today is a de facto implementation of the modern version of feudalism. And yes, it all starts with denying those with the least power to be paid a living wage.

I notice that you avoided addressing the problem with corporations making billions in profits out of taxpayer subsidized employees.

Why was that?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

I agree with pretty much all of that.
But I do not agree that minimum wage should necessarily be raised.
As I have posted in this thread 5 or 6 times now...part-time, min. wage jobs are not suppose to support one person let alone a family. It is not supposed to be "living wages".
The real problem in our economy is there is not enough basic jobs for the masses.
What is a basic job? Full time unskilled and skilled labor.
Labor has been dramatically cheapened over the past 30 years, and there has been no replacement for 100,000's lost good paying jobs except part-time low wage service jobs to which the President loves to brag about.
I don;t know what the answer is. I do not believe labor will return anytime in the near future if ever.
Welcome to a corporatized world economy. Exactly what Ross Perot said would happen.

Starving consumers of a living wage is a moronic shortsighted greed based approach to the economy.

In essence it reverses the hard work of the entire last century to improve the living standards for everyone in America. Those same living standards are what made America the economic power that it became.

The current greed based strip mining of the middle class wealth into the hands of a tiny obsessed bunch of powerful misers is going to have negative consequences for this nation and it is diametrically opposed to the Constitutional principles upon which this nation was founded.

What is happening today is a de facto implementation of the modern version of feudalism. And yes, it all starts with denying those with the least power to be paid a living wage.

I notice that you avoided addressing the problem with corporations making billions in profits out of taxpayer subsidized employees.

Why was that?

I am not avoiding anything.
Look through my posts and you would find many outlining how America is no longer a Democratic Republic, but a Corporate Plutocracy.
You won't find me disagreeing that our country is indeed being extracted. The wealth of the many is being mined to fill the bottomless pockets of an extreme few.
You would also find me repeating many times that ever since 2009 - the top 7% wage earners have lavished in a record 33% earnings increase while the rest of us, 93% WORKING Americans have suffered a 5% decline. As well as evaporating employee benefits such as pension plans. Thank God I have one.
Three of the past 5 Presidents are corporatist. Especially the current one. There has been no greater asset to the investment class than President Obama. Period. End of discussion on that.
We have lost. They have won. Question is, can we possibly get it back?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Three of the past 5 Presidents are corporatist. Especially the current one.

Which of them were not corporatists?

We have lost. They have won. Question is, can we possibly get it back?

We the People have the power to do whatever we set our minds to doing. We threw off the greatest superpower in the world at that time. Taking back our government and our living is well within our means IMO.

But our means do not include violence because that is counterproductive.

Instead we use peaceful means to accomplish our goals. We unite into voting blocs and refuse to elect anyone who accepts any corporate funding from any source whatsoever.

We boycott all corporations that are exploiting Citizens United. We vote with our dollars.

Does that work?

You betcha! Just look at what happened in Indiana when they effed up that legislation. Corporations couldn't bail fast enough. Ditto for Arizona.

So yes, We the People can take it back.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

So yes, We the People can take it back.

Not as long as we are so divided like we are today.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So yes, We the People can take it back.

Not as long as we are so divided like we are today.

That is part of the corporatist strategy to keep us divided. There is way more that unites We the People than the minor differences we have on political issues.

 

[BULLDOG]

For the life of me I can't see how liberals cannot see that whole reason why this minimum wage "problem" is even brought up is only a symptom of the real problem that they are too stupid to understand.
The problem is not minimum wage. The problem is so many good paying jobs have went overseas, eliminated by technology and eliminated by a HUGE rise in consolidations.
THAT is the problem - not minimum wage. But that adults are now working min. wage because there are no good jons left for them.

You could be right, but until those jobs come back we still have people who need to eat. I wish they would, but I don't see those jobs coming back real soon, do you?

 

[Wyatt earp]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

they will still be poor bozo and the threshold on entitlements will be raised, God you are dumb.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The simple fact is that consumers drive the economy and consumers without living wages aren't consumers. Instead they require subsidies from taxpayers. If the consumers were being paid living wages they wouldn't need taxpayer subsidies and they would be pushing the economy along just as they did in the 1990's.

This rush to the bottom is squeezing consumers so they can no longer afford to buy what they used to buy due to a lack of discretionary income.

Raising wages means more discretionary income which means a rising economy and better profits for corporations and shareholders.

It is self defeating to have to pay taxes by having corporations benefiting from taxpayer subsidized workers.

If a corporation can only get by with taxpayer subsidized workers it shouldn't be allowed to remain in business at all IMO. That is a violation of capitalism and completely at odds with what it means to be a genuine fiscal conservative.

they will still be poor bozo and the threshold on entitlements will be raised, God you are dumb.

Complete and utter failure to substantiate your position.