The $15 per hour minimum wage: another Progressive Liberal Success Story

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 11, 2015 1:15 PM GMT
    Progressive Liberals in Seattle have succeeded in adding more people to the ranks of the unemployed:

    The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) released a report Sunday that showed the unintended consequences of the phasing in of the $15 minimum wage in the city of Seattle. In the month of May, Seattle restaurants shed 1,000 jobs, which is the worst decline since Jan. 2009, when 1,300 jobs were eliminated:
    http://economiccollapsenews.com/2015/08/10/report-seattle-restaurant-industry-suffers-worst-job-loss-since-economic-collapse/

    Wendy's- Another Minimum Wage Backfire. Last week the Wendy’s Company did a public service on its second-quarter earnings call by explaining how mandated wage hikes will lead to fewer jobs for the low-skill workers that progressives claim to be helping:
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/another-minimum-wage-backfire-1439249236

    McDonalds, Taco Bell: Self order automation solutions to decrease employees needed:
    http://www.inquisitr.com/2135669/mcdonalds-self-serve-kiosks-a-response-to-higher-minimum-wage/



  • johan101

    Posts: 3

    Aug 11, 2015 10:15 PM GMT
    Not only the loss of jobs... The workers now making $15 are pissed off because they no longer qualify for free housing, food stamps etc etc... they are worse off
  • AttisXVI

    Posts: 293

    Aug 11, 2015 11:21 PM GMT
    johan101 saidNot only the loss of jobs... The workers now making $15 are pissed off because they no longer qualify for free housing, food stamps etc etc... they are worse off


    So then why did they demand more money if they knew they would no longer get free rides? Welcome to the contributing class of America. Life is tough here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 12:08 AM GMT
    johan101 saidNot only the loss of jobs... The workers now making $15 are pissed off because they no longer qualify for free housing, food stamps etc etc... they are worse off


    TRUE!!!

    tumblr_nstqokaUz01ta4jz7o1_540.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 12:13 AM GMT
    MuchMoreThanMuscle saidI'm not sure how true this is or how much Republicans are distorting this information. But what should also be considered is that $15 an hour only amounts to $30,000 a year (minus to weeks unpaid vacation time - otherwise $31,200 for those who get paid vacations).

    The average studio in Seattle rents for over $1,000 for a 300 square foot shit hole. Want a one bedroom? Try nearly doubling that figure. So now any Seattlelite who dreams of living alone in an appropriately sized one bedroom apartment will now have to fork over more than $21,000 in rent annually.

    Making $30K in a major US city doesn't really make life that much easier.
    Don't forget that most of those people still work part-time, so that comes out to around $20K/year. That's not even enough to live in a small town and still eat healthy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 1:01 AM GMT
    Liberal Democrats, these are your progressive policies. I guess democrats want the 1000 now unemployed restaurant workers to live in homeless shelters or underground Seattle:

    PC_20111001_163_4_5_6_7.jpg


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 1:34 AM GMT
    JuanPablomv89 saidWhy Hollywood celebrities make millions for doing nothing?

    Why the Kardashians make millions for being white trash cheap whores

    Why Caitlyn Jenner got paid $5 millions dollars for cutting her dick off?

    Why Fat ass Hillary Clinton is a fucing hypocrite

    Why Barack Obama is an IDIOT?


    Dude you're obsessed with the USA. I get that politics and US American pop culture might be attractive for your but why do you take things so personal? You don't even live there.
  • Rhi_Bran

    Posts: 904

    Aug 12, 2015 2:24 AM GMT
    Quality of life measures need to be put in place before wage raises are anything more than a band-aid fix.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 3:50 AM GMT
    Just some things to take into account:

    According to a Washington Post article linked by Wikipedia "The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research is a center-right think tank based in Washington, DC".

    The graph linked on the first post URL is clearly biased in many respects:
    -It begins at 100,000 instead of 0, making the decline more visually impacting.
    -The red arrow makes it look more dramatic.
    -If the graph is correct, food services jobs declined... ~0.74% (~135,000 -> ~134,000). "Large number of layoffs"? lol

    Additionally, the very small job loss cannot be entirely caused by the $15 minimum wage because it still isn't in effect 100%. This is how it goes:
    -"Beginning April 2015: Small employers (businesses with fewer than 500 employees) will reach a $15 an hour minimum wage in seven years.".
    -"Large employers (businesses with 500 or more employees, either in Seattle or nationally) will reach $15 per hour in three years.".

    Also, making such short term claims about the effects of a law that is not in full effect must have a very high error rate, which they don't mention anywhere.

    And to end up, raising the minimum wage can have lots of other consequences related to poverty, security, etc that can only be analyzed in the long term, not just because elections are around the corner.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 4:22 AM GMT
    mx5guynj saidLiberal Democrats, these are your progressive policies. I guess democrats want the 1000 now unemployed restaurant workers to live in homeless shelters or underground Seattle:
    This isn't a matter of any particular political party. This is a matter of both major political parties doing the exact same thing, and spinning it differently to appeal to a different voter base.

    The repubs make it clear they're for the wealthy, and claim that more wealthy people create more jobs, and the end result is more unemployment for the non-wealthy while the wealthy get even richer.

    The dems make it clear they're for the working class, and claim that the working class keep the job market growing, and the end result is more unemployment for the non-wealthy while the wealthy get even richer.

    It's all about the spin...not the party. See where I'm going with this? icon_wink.gif

  • Aug 12, 2015 7:36 AM GMT
    Now this guy knows what the f*** he's talking about. He is right on point.

    Dudes, stop letting yourselves constantly be lead to the trough of US media hype and PR. Don't you guys get how the system works yet? We're all adults here. Look at many perspectives and media sources, question everything, believe little, this is America the land of the Rich, Capitalists and Greed!

    If you believe anything you see on Fox, CNN or most local channels (cuz they just regurgitate the same shit the major media outlets spew) I can understand how screwed up your sense of reality must be.

    Oh, and stop watching reality TV. Remember: garbage in, garbage out! Ok, i'm done...

    enlalinea saidJust some things to take into account:

    According to a Washington Post article linked by Wikipedia "The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research is a center-right think tank based in Washington, DC".

    The graph linked on the first post URL is clearly biased in many respects:
    -It begins at 100,000 instead of 0, making the decline more visually impacting.
    -The red arrow makes it look more dramatic.
    -If the graph is correct, food services jobs declined... ~0.74% (~135,000 -> ~134,000). "Large number of layoffs"? lol

    Additionally, the very small job loss cannot be entirely caused by the $15 minimum wage because it still isn't in effect 100%. This is how it goes:
    -"Beginning April 2015: Small employers (businesses with fewer than 500 employees) will reach a $15 an hour minimum wage in seven years.".
    -"Large employers (businesses with 500 or more employees, either in Seattle or nationally) will reach $15 per hour in three years.".

    Also, making such short term claims about the effects of a law that is not in full effect must have a very high error rate, which they don't mention anywhere.

    And to end up, raising the minimum wage can have lots of other consequences related to poverty, security, etc that can only be analyzed in the long term, not just because elections are around the corner.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 7:50 AM GMT
    When I was coming up fast food jobs were for teens. Now with our government's free trade policies the good paying manufacturing jobs went overseas and unskilled labor was left to live off part time fast food and Walmart jobs. I don't know when the American people are going to wake up but corporate American has Congress in its back pocket.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 12:17 PM GMT
    We have to spread the wealth. There's simply too much income disparity between the rich and the poor. The current status quo with respect to the minimum wage is unacceptable (and that's coming from someone who's in the top percentile of working Americans).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 12, 2015 9:13 PM GMT
    mx5guynj saidProgressive Liberals in Seattle have succeeded in adding more people to the ranks of the unemployed:

    The American Enterprise Institute (AEI)...


    Cue regurgitated bullshit.

    Do you hate America? Explain, dumbfuck, how you want this. People working for minimum wage under $7 an hour, getting supplemental entitlements like SNAP, welfare, Medicaid and Section 8 housing, or $15 an hour minimum wage with less of that shit being paid for by you.

    Goddamnit, are you really this fucking stupid?

  • Aug 12, 2015 10:38 PM GMT
    Congratulations, progressive liberals of Seattle! Another victory for your ideals! You already made the city hostile to cars in hopes of boosting bicycle commutes when most cyclists do it recreationally. You paved the way for thought police to prevent those nasty conservatives from ever speaking their minds or mentioning observations. You will probably reelect Sawant so she can enact rent control, while increasing spending on worthy programs with increased taxes on those greedy elites. Never mind anyone moving away, we are just not worthy of the atmosphere you fostered. I'm just not smart enough to go to any universities in your city and I don't work hard enough to afford it. The wealthy businessmen moving just outside city limits just want to enjoy the beauty of Lake Washington or forests outside of major cities. The greedy businessmen who move out of the region and close businesses in the region (and all their businesses in Seattle) are just selfish dastards who want to live in backwards areas like Texas. I am sure your influx of immigrants will more than make up for it. No more will anyone work two jobs just to get by, nor will anyone working a fulltime job need welfare checks. Maybe you will even succeed in kicking out those conservatives, heterosexuals, and cissexist jerks from Capitol Hill so you can restore the atmosphere of the 1960s in your special neighborhood. Of course, you already succeeded in making all areas of the state friendly towards all lifestyles and will bring down the hammer of the law on any discriminating businesses operating on the antiquated ideals of freedom of religion, association, or press or the so-called right to refuse service.

    All your darkest hopes will soon come true and you will all get to reap what you worked so hard to sow!
  • metta

    Posts: 39167

    Aug 13, 2015 2:06 AM GMT
    Most companies hire the minimum number of employees they need in order to keep expenses down. If there are temporary job loses, I think over time most of those jobs will come back if they were necessary. That less people are living off the government and businesses are forced to pay a higher minimum wage is a good thing.

    Do you really believe that employers hired more employees than they needed prior to the increase because wages were lower?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 08, 2015 2:58 PM GMT
    Mc Donald's employees here in Australia , have an minimum wage of Au $ dollars , so it definitely can be done !!
    Read article below from 2013 for a comparison of low wages between the U.S and Australia



    * Can You Live On A McDonald's Wage In Australia?
    Angus Kidman
    17 July 2013 11:30 AM


    A much-discussed article doing the rounds this week examines how much a McDonald’s worker can make in a full-time job in the US and whether that would constitute a viable living wage. Does the same logic apply in Australia?

    The post by Death And Taxes takes as its starting point a sample budget developed by McDonald’s for use by its staff. It then suggests how that money might be spent: Here’s an example quoted in the post:

    The really astounding thing about this calculation is that it includes two jobs, both of which are effectively full-time. In large part, that reflects a very low minimum wage in many US states. Whether the other figures in the sample budget are accurate is also open to dispute. Even if they are, having to work two full-time jobs for mere subsistence living seems appalling.

    In Australia, the situation is somewhat different. For full-time adult workers, we have a nationally mandated minimum wage if there isn’t an enterprise agreement in place. McDonald’s has such an agreement, so we can work with its figures.

    The version voted on for 2013 in NSW gives a good indication of what gets paid at the moment. (Those numbers would vary from state to state, but they serve as a basis for discussion.) These are the figures for a full-time (40 hours per week) Level 2 worker per week and per month, based on age, as of June 24 this year:
    Age Weekly Monthly
    21+ $695.41 $2781.64
    20 $625.87 $2503.48
    19 $556.33 $2225.32
    18 $486.79 $1947.16
    17 $417.25 $1669.00
    16 $347.71 $1390.84
    15 $278.16 $1112.64

    Clearly, if you were a budget-minded McDonald’s franchise owner, you would employ as many good teenagers as you could find and let them worry about living on $1112 a month. However, it’s also reasonable to assume that people under 18 are going to be living at home in many cases and not responsible for the same range of expenses.

    In terms of this comparison, note that even for a 19-year-old, the sum total for working one job is higher than the equivalent worker in the US manages with two jobs, so life is automatically looking a little better. For the rest of this discussion, we’ll use the 19-year-old as an example. (Note: I’ll also ignore the potential existence of travel allowances or other benefits, since these aren’t disclosed as openly in public documents.)

    The first important point: those are pre-tax figures. A worker on these wages definitely benefits from the higher tax-free threshold that currently applies in Australia. Anyone who earns less than $18,200 a year pays no tax; this job isn’t under that threshold, but only about $10,000 of the annual income is actually taxable. If this is the sole job, the tax taken out each week will be $47, leaving the earner with $509.33 a week, or $2037 over the month.

    Now let’s build a provisional budget for our McDonald’s worker. I’m skipping several elements from the US budget. For starters, I haven’t included health care, since we do have Medicare. For the phone, I’m presuming $40 a month for a prepaid unlimited mobile. The food budget is a not-quite-Mastercheap but hardly generous $50 a week (I’m guessing you’d get at least some food at work). The other figures are definitely open to discussion and subject to a lot of variables (including where you live and the distance to your work).
    Category Monthly
    Monthly income $2037
    Rent $600
    Car payment $500
    Car costs $100
    Phone $40
    Electricity $50
    Food $200
    Spare/savings $747

    That leftover $747 for a month might sound OK, but bear in mind that I haven’t included savings, purchasing clothes, medical emergencies, child care, additional health insurance, visits to the laundry, unexpected mechanical disasters, or any kind of social life. The budget definitely looks better (and more realistic) than the US one that has been (quite rightly) derided, but it doesn’t look like a lifestyle anyone would want to sustain indefinitely.

    What can we all learn from this? Firstly, that we’re massively better off living in Australia than the US.