The point is that it wouldn't be the end of the world if some companies go under as a result of a minimum wage increase. Their business model is predicated on paying wages.Now you're going to throw out random fallacy claims and hope I chase after them?
no
If fewer businesses means better products then unless there's a crossover point where that's no longer true (that you haven't defined) then you're wrong. Pricing business out of business doesn't raise the value of the good or service that remains. It only lowers the supply side of the supply/demand equation thus causing room for a price increase or quality decrease.
Are you saying that, as of right now, less valuable products are in higher demand than their more valuable counterparts?
I never mentioned states rights or minimum wage.
I think minimum wages should be raised. I don't think it had anything to do with M&S closure. Then the comment was made that a business that could afford X should be able to afford X. That's obviously a tautology (by using two different words for "afford" which means you have enough money, the other being "sufficient". Sufficient is akin to "enough". Reduced to LCD it's saying "if you had enough demand would you make enough money?" So there's either a nonsensical statement (if demand can never generate money sp no amount is enough, which rules out the first part of the question "enough demand" since "enough to generate the right amount of money" is obviously inferred) or the question was already answered by the time it was asked "enough demand to..."
So what are you arguing? You said that fewer businesses would mean more valuable products. You didn't define how you gauge value. If you mean a monopoly holds the most valuable products because they can charge whatever they want for it (like water during a drought), then you must mean quality vs price. How does having fewer businesses equate to better quality vs price and how does having more businesses equate to having less quality vs price, as options? Fewer options is fewer options. More options is always better.
It sounds like we agree on quite a bit. Don't be so eager to argue and show everyone how smart you are. You're like a pre-teen trying to get his hands on his first set of s.
You said this in response to a statement I made that wasn't even directed to you:
"The result of a higher minimum wage may result in fewer choices and jobs in the associated industry, but all surviving choices and associated jobs will ultimately deliver a better product to the consumer, forcing progression as opposed to a race to the bottom."
I'm still waiting for you to explain how you arrived at the conclusion in bold.
Again, don't be so eager to argue and parse every word as if this were a court of law. The statement was akin to separating the wheat from the chaff. I'm sorry that was not explicitly clear to you.
There's gonna be a whole lotta poorer people in the coming years. I bet they will still have Jordans and Iphones tho, along with more murders and robberies "to feed the fam", but still...Jordans and Iphones for the impoverished...and higher wages...to go with higher inflation.
Why don't you try and parse ^ that piece of DCM?
Do you wish to abandon your comments?
You made a complex statement without regard to the ramifications of it being true. Now you are just dismissing it as front porch chatter.
Which is the wheat, which the chaff? Wheat = higher priced goods? Is there more value in higher priced goods? If so, why doesn't everyone buy those instead?
It's a prediction. How can I argue?
Figure it out on your own...
Think next time before interrupt an adult.
Heightened minimum wage causes stagflation. Economics 101. OP is correct.
If anything, a lower minimum wage is more communist and a higher one is more capitalist. Because with a higher one, less people work for more, so you have some a high degree of millennial inequality, because the most popular or attractive or athletic ones get the $15-20 an hour minimum wage while a large amount of others get zero because business can't afford to employ more.
https://www.google.com/search?q=asso...t+rate&spf=373
yet, Seattle's unemployment rate is still below the national average...
https://fortress.wa.gov/esd/employme...ent-report.pdf
Current employment rate doesn't show any substantial blips either.
Leaving me with one thing for tlongII:
The plural of anecdote is not data.
OP fail.
I see RandomGuy is posting irrelevant information again.
You don't think that overall employment would be affected by a substantial increase in the minimum wage?
It's areas like $15 minimum wage where Democrats bolster the impression that they're a bunch of coastal urban elites who don't know anything about how Rural America works. $15 minimum wage makes absolutely no sense in Mineral Wells, TX. Any minimum wage legislation has to take into account cost of living and other local nuances or it will destroy commerce in small towns.
I'm completely on board with raising minimum wage on a regional scale that makes sense. But $15 an hour nationally doesn't really make sense.
15? booboo wants 25 nationally
not even joking
He really does. My jaw dropped to the floor when that got was arguing for something like a $21/hour minimum wage a few months ago.15? booboo wants 25 nationally
not even joking
mom and pop farms have just consolidated and incorporated. Just Mom&Pop, Inc. now.
People who think otherwise are naive, dumb, biased, never worked more than a minimum wage job or don't have the initiative and balls to open a business. That's why people like Boot's make stupid assertions like
"Big Corporate KILLED mom +pops". Yeah, increasing labor costs 10-15% over a two or three year period on SMBs that, on average, have lower profit margins, won't do it.
That's just an ignorant statement. I used to feel the same way when I was working grunt labor, but I was 100% honest with myself and knew why I was working dead-end occupations; 100% ME.
We moved here to the Central Valley in 09, right in the middle of the absolute worst part of the recession and in the worst economic climate in the country at the time per CNN and Time. Family-funded our business, grown 10-15% every year and with the wage increases, it's insanely difficult to attract, retain quality employees while giving them clear salary and career projections with us as 1-2 years worth of raises is given to them annually by the Government.
More businesses are closing in Cali than opening at an alarming rate, worse than 09, right after we get some ing growth in this hole Valley, because the Crime Syndicate lead by Boss Brown, is doing something so stupid and even said "we don't know how this will work ( ing reassurance from the Left) " and not a single reputable economist will sign off on.
But again, idiots like Boots, who've probably done nothing to support his community or other people in any way, spout their stupid parroted drivel of "BIG CORP durp, durp, durp". got.
Even more, he makes such contradictory statements because he puts his partisan preference at the expense of blatant hypocrisy.
"Angry teenager" is pretty much the mood of this entire board. Maybe 2-5% of my posts here are "serious", but you've got it all figured out, right, Dr. Phil?
I don't mean to run afoul your expert diagnosis, but contrary to your findings, Doc, I do run a successful business. Two locations- Modesto, CA and Boise, ID. 40 employees. I'm comfortable, I'm my own boss, my employees like working for me and I make ok money and we grew our business in the worst economic climate in the country.
If I were looking for your approval, I'd post my check stubs. But I'm secure and see no need to fish for approval from STers. You, I believe in my expert opinion, are not as secure. Otherwise this unwarranted attack wouldn't be a thing seeing as I've never had a word with you ever in my time here.
I don't know your situation, or why you'd attack me unwarranted. It could be that you're in a rough spot and struggling financially and ST might be your only outlet to vent your anger and frustrations from your failures. Whatever I did to incur your rage, I do apologize and I hope everything works out for you, I truly do. I'm certain you're a lovely lady and everything will improve for you in time, just hang in there, Kiddo! I'm, like all of us, are pulling for you!
How does my "condescending " schtick work for ya? Loosen the glutes a bit?
(hope I got the sentiment right)
I am sure overall employment would be affected, I'm just not sure how much. The data from Seattle seem to indicate little effect other than at the edges in marginally profitable businesses like the one tlongII is hanging his hat on.
States make for good laboratories. It is how we know that trickle down is useless (think Kansas). Let a state raise the minimum wage and see what happens to the velocity of money. Poorer people tend to spend more relative to their earnings out of sheer necessity (marginal income).
Let Cali work it out.
"I am sure overall employment would be affected"
decades of data say you are shirley wrong. Aren't supposed to be some kind of economic person? data driven?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote