minimum wage hikes(follow-up)...not so good

[WellsstreetWanderer]

rocket, you have such stream-of-consciousness silliness that you don't even remember what you say. x

I don't think you're a caveman. You just judge poor people more harshly than rich people for the same behavior, and you favor Reverse Robin Hood behavior as most on your side of the aisle do. I mean, just look at those two healthcare bills! Even the Orange Menace called the House version "mean" (after holding a party to celebrate it, of course), and the Senate one was so draconian that unicorns moderate Republicans were running from it.

And of course, when in doubt, bring out "liberal," "libs," "libbys," etc. Labeling and name-calling are always the easy, fall-back put-down.

The Congress is trying to fix the healthcare mess. It is not a pretty process but responsible people are trying and nothing is perfect but something must be done. 14 counties here in Nevada are losing ALL insurance come January.
Surgeon and  i disagree with you how to help the poor and underprivaleged.  I think a hand up is more effective way rather than the mantra of how bad the country is.POTUs is committed to help in a positive wzy with jobs,etc. The previous occupant of th WH gave out phones and little else.

[Mutaman]

The Congress is trying to fix the healthcare mess. It is not a pretty process but responsible people are trying and nothing is perfect but something must be done.

No question about it. And that's why an overwhelming 17% of Americans approve of their efforts. maybe they should throw in a free phone.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/28/senate-gop-health-care-bill-has-dismal-approval-rating-poll.html

[Jockey]

For the record .. please just call POTUS Trump.   

I always hated when people posted "Obambi" and whatnot .. it's just a cheap and unnecessary shot to use that kind of slang.

I vowed when the creep was elected that it was only fair to show him the same respect that he showed to Mr. Obama. Hence, I usually just call him the "orange pig".

However, out of respect for you, I will do my best to keep it under control.

No promises, though

[MU82]

^^^^ Pleading for a ban

Luv ya, too, JB!

[Mutaman]

It is not a pretty process but responsible people are trying and nothing is perfect but something must be done.

Also have to agree that I've been pretty impressed with the way these responsible people have been opening this process up for a public debate. The hearings on the proposed new law have been both educational
and stimulating. i really have enjoyed watching these responsible men consider the implications of various health care policy proposals in the bipartisan committee sessions that have been  carried live on C-SPAN. Watching votes on all the amendments has been also very interesting.
Thank goodness for responsible Republicans.

[B. McBannerson]

I encourage all to listen to season 1 - episodes 4-6 - of Malcolm Gladwell's Revisionist History. It gets right at some of the topics covered in this thread. Namely, why it's so difficult for poor people to get to even middle class level. And, especially, how misguided we are in the capitalization of talent/skill in the US. It's pretty incredible.

I listened. Some really good things in there. Do not agree with all.  This is why I linked to the University of Washington study on the Seattle minimum wage.  For some reason you thought I was triggered. 

Here is the Washington Post article on that study, and it feeds right into what you are saying in that it is difficult for poor people to get to the middle class. The study suggests Seattle's minimum wage hike is making it even harder for the poor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/new-study-casts-doubt-on-whether-a-15-minimum-wage-really-helps-workers/?utm_term=.5c57be313af4

[B. McBannerson]

rocket, you have such stream-of-consciousness silliness that you don't even remember what you say. x

I don't think you're a caveman. You just judge poor people more harshly than rich people for the same behavior, and you favor Reverse Robin Hood behavior as most on your side of the aisle do. I mean, just look at those two healthcare bills! Even the Orange Menace called the House version "mean" (after holding a party to celebrate it, of course), and the Senate one was so draconian that unicorns moderate Republicans were running from it.

What do you suggest they do?  Obamacare is failing as additional insurance companies pull out. This has been going on since 2014 when the Dems had the Senate and Presidency.  Should Congress continue to let it go in that direction?  There is no real fix, any fix is more bad policy.  A bad law from the start, doomed to fail.  Any approach to fix it, people whine about it.

What is your solution, kindly asking.  I don't know, it is a complex issue for sure.

[Mutaman]

What do you suggest they do? 

See my post of 10:15:32 PM for starters.

[B. McBannerson]

Yes, major fraud. Just because the PR department has an excuse handy, defrauding taxpayers out of millions and millions of dollars is major fraud.

If a "welfare queen" did something 1/10,000th as bad, it would be Major, Major, Major Fraud to many, and they'd want to lock her up.

Wouldn't the right answer be to deal with corporate fraud and individual fraud?  Including gov't fraud?  That case in New Jersey the last few weeks, that fraud means poor people are not receiving what was meant for them.  http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2017/07/the_14_people_charged_with_benefits_fraud_in_lakewood.html

[B. McBannerson]

(Once semis go fully driverless, some talk that they can only operate on the interstate overnight.  That gets them off the roads during business hours reducing traffic and accidents.  To incentive this, they will allow them to drive at 100mph or more.  That way they can cover almost 1000 miles when everyone is sleeping and traffic is sparse.)

This is great.  I travel to Illinois, California, NM, Ark, MO and AZ quite a bit.  Driving is an enjoyment, but in some of those locations it isn't.  With trucks off the road, I'm more inclined to want to drive than ever before.  The notion of not wanting to own a car and to share it, some will get on board with.  My kids say no way. They brought up a great point.  When you rent a car, it feels like 500 people drove it.  That is what will happen with this share a ride.  People will not take care of them because they do not own them.

No pride of ownership.  Spill a drink in it, no big deal. Vomit. Eh.  Kids rip the seat, not my problem.  These things are going to get torn to hell and the cost of cleaning and maintaining will be high. This doesn't even begin to get into spreading of some interesting fluids and other wonderful things we all get to now sit in for these mobile petri dishes.  Get those trucks off the road, let me drive.

[rocket surgeon]

  " Spill a drink in it, no big deal. Vomit. Eh.  Kids rip the seat, not my problem.  These things are going to get torn to hell and the cost of cleaning and maintaining will be high. This doesn't even begin to get into spreading of some interesting fluids and other wonderful things we all get to now sit in for these mobile petri dishes. "

  bad bad visual-got me to thinking-checked in to this nice suite at new york new york in vegas a couple weeks ago.  i like 'em cuz the wife and i each have our own w.c.'s for you know, when that moment arrives(not that moment)  anyway, instead of 2 w.c.'s they have this big f'ing jacuzzi tub right there in the middle...wtf?? didn't tell me one the toilets was one made for 2 or...?  not all the clorox, viagra, booze and baywatch babes would get me near that...hang on a second, my wife is looking at my kinda funny.  well, throw in char mckinney and some antibiotics and we'll give it a thought though...wait, now my wife's carrying armloads of my stuff outside-gotta go

[jesmu84]

I listened. Some really good things in there. Do not agree with all.  This is why I linked to the University of Washington study on the Seattle minimum wage.  For some reason you thought I was triggered. 

Here is the Washington Post article on that study, and it feeds right into what you are saying in that it is difficult for poor people to get to the middle class. The study suggests Seattle's minimum wage hike is making it even harder for the poor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/new-study-casts-doubt-on-whether-a-15-minimum-wage-really-helps-workers/?utm_term=.5c57be313af4

Yup. Seems to be, at least in this case - similar to Kansas - a failed experiment by one of the political sides.

My point in asking others to listen to the podcast was to possibly have them understand/realize what situations are out there for others. Had nothing to do with minimum wage, per se

[forgetful]

I listened. Some really good things in there. Do not agree with all.  This is why I linked to the University of Washington study on the Seattle minimum wage.  For some reason you thought I was triggered. 

Here is the Washington Post article on that study, and it feeds right into what you are saying in that it is difficult for poor people to get to the middle class. The study suggests Seattle's minimum wage hike is making it even harder for the poor.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/new-study-casts-doubt-on-whether-a-15-minimum-wage-really-helps-workers/?utm_term=.5c57be313af4

The problem with that study is you can find other reputable studies that show something different. You also cannot take anything away from their conclusions is they do not know the source of the actual problems they define, and if it is even the minimum wage increase.


There are other exacerbating circumstances also.  You and others like to point to this saying it shows raising the minimum wage doesn't help, it hurts.  That is a false conclusion from even the data presented.  What could possibly be concluded is that raising the minimum wage too quickly in that particular market had unintended consequences according to this particular methodology. 


Most research indicates that minimum wage hikes have a profound impact on mitigating the growing wealth gap and improving the quality of life for the lowest wage earners.  The key is how to implement the wage hike slowly and more universally, Seattle did it fairly rapidly, others have gradually increased it with better effects.  We have neglected the minimum wage for a long time, leaving it at historical lows. 


There is always going to be a period of adaptation.  Some restaurants/markets will adapt quickly and intelligently.  They thrive, their employees thrive.  Others make poor choices or fail to adapt, they fail.  That leads to an initial period of heightened turnover that can last for 5-years or more.  You should wait 5 years to judge the results. 


On top of these expected aspects, additional market pressures exist, such as new rules regarding health care, that particularly hit the industries discussed here.  One cannot easily separate these variables with documented precision right now.  Again, that can lead to false conclusions.  I would contend that the methodology employed by these individuals cannot decouple these additional variables accurately.


The authors of the paper actually note that there are limitations to their method, particularly the lack of an extended and lengthy time series to estimate effects.  They also say it cannot be used to estimate effects of laws on a statewide or national level. 


There are numerous other potential flaws in their methodology that would bias the result to a near 0 or slightly negative effect on employment/wages.  Most of these flaws have not been remotely examined. 


My point is that this study is just another study.  It should not be relied upon to make broad sweeping claims as we do not even know that their methodology can accurately capture the effects of the minimum wage increase, nor do we know if the market has actually adapted to the changes and that conditions reflect the long term impact of the minimum wage increase. 


Time will tell...we are not there yet.

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

Vander Orange Menace?

This post did not get enough appreciation

[rocket surgeon]

The problem with that study is you can find other reputable studies that show something different. You also cannot take anything away from their conclusions is they do not know the source of the actual problems they define, and if it is even the minimum wage increase.


There are other exacerbating circumstances also.  You and others like to point to this saying it shows raising the minimum wage doesn't help, it hurts.  That is a false conclusion from even the data presented.  What could possibly be concluded is that raising the minimum wage too quickly in that particular market had unintended consequences according to this particular methodology. 


Most research indicates that minimum wage hikes have a profound impact on mitigating the growing wealth gap and improving the quality of life for the lowest wage earners.  The key is how to implement the wage hike slowly and more universally, Seattle did it fairly rapidly, others have gradually increased it with better effects.  We have neglected the minimum wage for a long time, leaving it at historical lows. 


There is always going to be a period of adaptation.  Some restaurants/markets will adapt quickly and intelligently.  They thrive, their employees thrive.  Others make poor choices or fail to adapt, they fail.  That leads to an initial period of heightened turnover that can last for 5-years or more.  You should wait 5 years to judge the results. 


On top of these expected aspects, additional market pressures exist, such as new rules regarding health care, that particularly hit the industries discussed here.  One cannot easily separate these variables with documented precision right now.  Again, that can lead to false conclusions.  I would contend that the methodology employed by these individuals cannot decouple these additional variables accurately.


The authors of the paper actually note that there are limitations to their method, particularly the lack of an extended and lengthy time series to estimate effects.  They also say it cannot be used to estimate effects of laws on a statewide or national level. 


There are numerous other potential flaws in their methodology that would bias the result to a near 0 or slightly negative effect on employment/wages.  Most of these flaws have not been remotely examined. 


My point is that this study is just another study.  It should not be relied upon to make broad sweeping claims as we do not even know that their methodology can accurately capture the effects of the minimum wage increase, nor do we know if the market has actually adapted to the changes and that conditions reflect the long term impact of the minimum wage increase. 


Time will tell...we are not there yet.

workers are making less overall, hours are being cut and businesses are closing.  now, let's just say you are a business man and you want to open something in say, seattle or someplace where they haven't instituted a minimum wage policy to kick in and ramp up.  where will you put your business?

  ya see, it's easy to watch from afar, but when it's your money or mine for that matter, i don't need a study

[Tugg Speedman]

Back to the Minimum Wage ...

http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/30/news/minimum-wage-hikes-july-1/index.html
Here's where workers will get a boost on July 1, and how much they'll start making.

* Chicago: $11 an hour.
* Cook County, Illinois: $10 an hour.
* Emeryville, California: $15.20 an hour for businesses with more than 56 employees, and $14 an hour for businesses with 55 or fewer employees.
* Flagstaff, Arizona: $10.50 an hour.
* Los Angeles: $12 an hour for businesses with more than 26 employees, and $10.50 an hour for businesses with 25 or fewer employees.
* Maryland: $9.25 an hour.
* Milpitas, California: $11 an hour.
* Montgomery County, Maryland: $11.50 an hour.
* Oregon: $10.25 an hour. (Exception: $11.25 an hour in the Portland metro area, and $10 an hour in some counties designated as "non-urban.")
* Pasadena, California: $12 an hour for businesses with 26 or more employees, and $10.50 an hour or businesses with 25 or fewer employees.
* San Francisco: $14 an hour.
* San Jose, California: $12 an hour.
* San Leandro, California: $12 an hour.
* Santa Monica, California: $12 an hour for businesses with 26 or more employees, and $10.50 an hour or businesses with 25 or fewer employees.
* Washington, D.C.: $12.50 an hour.

Who are the minimum wage workers?The Bureau of Labor Statistics released a yearly report on this subject.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2016/home.htm

In 2016, 79.9 million workers age 16 and older in the United States were paid at hourly rates, representing 58.7 percent of all wage and salary workers. Among those paid by the hour, 701,000 workers earned exactly the prevailing federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. About 1.5 million had wages below the federal minimum. Together, these 2.2 million workers with wages at or below the federal minimum made up 2.7 percent of all hourly paid workers.


52% of all minimum wage workers are in the fast food industry.  Can they afford it? 

From page three of this thread ... the price of a burger does matter

The Wall Street Journal
May 31, 2017
Diners Are Finding $13 Burgers Hard to Swallow
Number of outlets peddling gourmet toppings has nearly quadrupled since 2005, but sticker-shocked consumers opt for home grilling instead

https://www.wsj.com/articles/diners-are-finding-13-burgers-hard-to-swallow-1496241667

As the number of outlets serving “better” burgers—featuring nontraditional toppings and artisan buns—has skyrocketed over the past decade, so has the average burger tab, turning some customers off.

Brian Cockerline, a 20-year-old Rutgers University student, used to go to Five Guys for a burger once a week in South Plainfield, N.J. With fries and a drink, his tab was about $13.

Now, he is cooking burgers at home instead.

So what is the fast food industry doing about it?  Getting rid of workers as fast as possible(while many here want to feel better by citing discredited studies about the minimum wage.)

From page 2 of this thread:

McDonalds Is Replacing 2,500 Human Cashiers With Digital Kiosks: Here Is Its Math
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-23/mcdonalds-replacing-2500-human-cashiers-digital-kiosks-here-its-math

And now this ...

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/smmLfwU5W-4&amp;" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/smmLfwU5W-4&amp;</a>

Robots are coming to a burger joint near you
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/04/miso-robotics-is-bringing-artificial-intelligence-to-restaurants.html

And this guy that might know a thing or two about the minimum wage ...

In a decade, many fast-food restaurants will be automated, says Yum Brands CEO
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/28/in-a-decade-many-fast-food-restaurants-will-be-automated-says-yum-brands-ceo.html

[Tugg Speedman]

Sure. But what do you do for those that are 40, 50, 60 that are not a part of the "future" workforce? Those people are still going to be employed for the next couple decades. Minimum wage jobs are not going to be enough to sustain.

More from the BLS study on the minimum wage:

https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2016/home.htm

45% of minimum wage workers are 16 to 24
21% are age 40 to 65
3% are 65+

21% are married
13% are divorced
65% never married

Can we finally put to rest this canard that minimum wage workers are trying to raise a family?  That demographic exists but it is very small.  And those that are only capable of a minimum wage job and have a family have plenty of other government assistance programs besides the minimum wage.

The minimum wage is an entry level job and when you raise the price of something, you get less of it (and more robots and kiosks, see above)

As Chili correctly noted, the minimum wage is a political issue as unions use it as a benchmark (i.e., a job gets 200% of the minimum wage) so the unions are leading the charge to raise it for their workers, they don't care what it does to teenagers trying to get a job.

Oh, and according to this table, 5% of union workers are 16 to 24 versus 45% of 16 to 24 are minimum wage earners.  Unions don't care what havoc the cause to the 16 to 24-year-old job market because so few of them are their members.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.t01.htm

[jesmu84]

More from the BLS study on the minimum wage:

https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/minimum-wage/2016/home.htm

45% of minimum wage workers are 16 to 24
21% are age 40 to 65
3% are 65+

21% are married
13% are divorced
65% never married

Can we finally put to rest this canard that minimum wage workers are trying to raise a family?  That demographic exists but it is very small.  And those that are only capable of a minimum wage job and have a family have plenty of other government assistance programs besides the minimum wage.

The minimum wage is an entry level job and when you raise the price of something, you get less of it (and more robots and kiosks, see above)

As Chili correctly noted, the minimum wage is a political issue as unions use it as a benchmark (i.e., a job gets 200% of the minimum wage) so the unions are leading the charge to raise it for their workers, they don't care what it does to teenagers trying to get a job.

Oh, and according to this table, 5% of union workers are 16 to 24 versus 45% of 16 to 24 are minimum wage earners.  Unions don't care what havoc the cause to the 16 to 24-year-old job market because so few of them are their members.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.t01.htm

Point is, we do a poor job in the us of placing decent value on low-level employees. Including those that are just above the minimum wage standard

Raise minimum wage then raise other lower levels, bring down upper levels and everyone wins.

[Tugg Speedman]

Point is, we do a poor job in the us of placing decent value on low-level employees. Including those that are just above the minimum wage standard

Raise minimum wage then raise other lower levels, bring down upper levels and everyone wins.

Huh?  How many more millions have to suffer under socialist ideals for you to understand this has never worked?

[mu03eng]

Point is, we do a poor job in the us of placing decent value on low-level employees. Including those that are just above the minimum wage standard

Raise minimum wage then raise other lower levels, bring down upper levels and everyone wins.

This seems to be vaguely evocative of "From each according to their ability and to each according to their need"

Really not on-board with you there.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

No question about it. And that's why an overwhelming 17% of Americans approve of their efforts. maybe they should throw in a free phone.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/28/senate-gop-health-care-bill-has-dismal-approval-rating-poll.html

Further on the subject.  Some real actual fix suggestions not being discussed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nine-ways-to-really-fix-obamacare/2017/06/30/dc5a8fc4-5cfc-11e7-a9f6-7c3296387341_story.html?utm_term=.d021d87ea300

[B. McBannerson]

Are you referring to name calling like "orange menace" or your own outright hypocrisy is oblivious to you

"When they go low, we go high."   Shortest lived ethos in history

[GGGG]

"When they go low, we go high."   Shortest lived ethos in history

Not really.  It's all relative.

[mu03eng]

Further on the subject.  Some real actual fix suggestions not being discussed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nine-ways-to-really-fix-obamacare/2017/06/30/dc5a8fc4-5cfc-11e7-a9f6-7c3296387341_story.html?utm_term=.d021d87ea300

eh, not sure how much they are fixes as opposed to just fingers to be stuck in the dike to keep an already poorly constructed system.

[MUBurrow]

Per my comments earlier in this thread, I'm sympathetic to the cause of narrowing the gap between the minimum wage and the actual cost of living, given the disjointed, line item approach to the social safety net. But for me, arguing about the minimum wage as a lens for either the status of the middle class over the past 30 years or the current standard of living for low-earners is bringing a knife to a gun fight.