City of Seattle to raise minimum wage to $15/hr

Morpheus

New member
I live in North Carolina, dude. Seattle is almost 3,000 miles away.

I understand, but I assume that you might have traveled. I have lived in Seattle for short periods, and I have family and friends there.

Thanks to the Kochs a large percentage of people who live in North Carolina don't earn enough to even eat healthily. Ergo the proliferation of Walmart there. The expense of travel is a luxury often out of reach for them. Slavery is not dead, just transformed.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Sounds like it will go as planned...employers will cut in other areas to make up the difference and it will be a net zero. If you lose all your benefits and gain a higher wage, what have you you gained? nothing...it's a push.
Then the employees should unionize, and demand recompense. And we should support them. Otherwise, those of us who work for a living are just condoning our own abuse.
 

Morpheus

New member
With all the talk about economic laws, why is it that workers on the right keep on defending employers' argument that position hey just can't afford paying raises in wages? Don't they realize that while those wages have been stagnant prices have continued to rise? If prices are rising, but wages remain stagnant, economically speaking where does the increased income go? Higher profits.

Basically larger businesses, and their shareholders, have thrived at the expense of not only their employees, but also small businesses and government. By stifling wages to stuff their own pockets their employees' purchasing power gradually decreases each year. And as consumer purchasing power decreases, the small businesses that depend on that portion of the population for survival also gradually die from attrition. That's the problem with social Darwinism; while a few gobble up most of the resources, others starve.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
With all the talk about economic laws, why is it that workers on the right keep on defending employers' argument that position hey just can't afford paying raises in wages? Don't they realize that while those wages have been stagnant prices have continued to rise? If prices are rising, but wages remain stagnant, economically speaking where does the increased income go? Higher profits.

Basically larger businesses, and their shareholders, have thrived at the expense of not only their employees, but also small businesses and government. By stifling wages to stuff their own pockets their employees' purchasing power gradually decreases each year. And as consumer purchasing power decreases, the small businesses that depend on that portion of the population for survival also gradually die from attrition. That's the problem with social Darwinism; while a few gobble up most of the resources, others starve.

:blabla:

Socialist indoctrination.

In fact, businesses have to struggle with hiring and retaining employees, government regulations, competition and a host of other issues that make a mockery of your conspiracy nonsense.
 

PureX

Well-known member
With all the talk about economic laws, why is it that workers on the right keep on defending employers' argument that they just can't afford paying raises in wages? Don't they realize that while those wages have been stagnant prices have continued to rise? If prices are rising, but wages remain stagnant, economically speaking where does the increased income go? Higher profits.
I have been puzzled by this as well. They basically work at maintaining an ignorance that harms themselves. Why would anyone do that???

I don't know the answer. Folks like 'Stripe', here, just seem to hate humanity. They want to see people suffering. They want there to be big winners and big losers because they like to see the losers suffer. Somehow it makes them feel better about themselves, I think, because there's always someone who's a bigger loser than they are. And they need that feeling of superiority. (Just my theory)

All I know is that there's a deliberate mean-spiritedness in it that's inexplicable. I was in a Bible discussion group one time when the subject of the evening was the Biblical meaning of the term 'perversity'. And what was pointed out, through the readings, was that the term did not exclusively refer to sexual perversion, but rather to a kind of spiritual perversion, wherein one acts deliberately contrary to the general good, and even at the cost of their own well-being.

I think a lot of modern religious Christians and conservatives in general, these days, have fallen victim to this kind of spiritual perversity, wherein they deliberately speak and act contrary to the general good, even at the cost of their own well-being. Why? I don't know. When I have behaved this way in my own life it was because I had succumbed to an addiction that warped and twisted my heart and mind to the degree that I was "chasing the bottom". I had become fascinated by the process of my own destruction. How that might relate to this, I can't say.
 
Last edited:

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
With all the talk about economic laws, why is it that workers on the right keep on defending employers' argument that position hey just can't afford paying raises in wages? Don't they realize that while those wages have been stagnant prices have continued to rise? If prices are rising, but wages remain stagnant, economically speaking where does the increased income go? Higher profits.

Basically larger businesses, and their shareholders, have thrived at the expense of not only their employees, but also small businesses and government. By stifling wages to stuff their own pockets their employees' purchasing power gradually decreases each year. And as consumer purchasing power decreases, the small businesses that depend on that portion of the population for survival also gradually die from attrition. That's the problem with social Darwinism; while a few gobble up most of the resources, others starve.

And somehow the Government will fix all this with regulation or mandate? I actually agree with your assessment of wage stagnation in this country, (the numbers prove it) while the net worth of these companies & their executives continues to rise but, outside of yet more government intrusion how can the tide be turned?

In fact, businesses have to struggle with hiring and retaining employees, government regulations, competition and a host of other issues that make a mockery of your conspiracy nonsense.

This is the biggest reason that companies & their execs are extending & retaining profits while paying virtually the same to their employees year after year. Here is an article from pew research that talks a bit about it. Morpheous is correct when he is speaking of the decades of wage stagnation in the U.S. but, I don't think he & I agree on it's causes or how to fix the problem. The Middle class in America has been shrinking since the 70's but, how we get it built back up seems to be the sticking point for many. Government regulation on business has just made the problem worse. This was a great article outlining the issue albeit about a year old but, still quite timely, we may not all agree how we got here but, we cannot deny it exists.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2014/02/16/the-u-s-middle-class-is-turning-proletarian/
 
Last edited:

Word based mystic

New member
i have small restoration business. pressure washing and such

firstly. If I have to pay $15 or more for new unproven employee I would have to raise my prices to customers.

I would have to invest much time in training entry level worker.

workmans comp has gone up considerably.

health insurance costs for employees have doubled since obamacare.

an incentive raise for good work and loyalty would be minimal if at all
being that i am near max for pay of blue collar work of this type.

As it is work has not gotten back to pre-2008 levels.

most of my clients want ((discounts)) due to their own low work or loss of job status.

I already give my new entry green horns $12/hr and my efficient and experienced workers $20/hr.

matching fica
regulations on small businesses have increased.
workmans comp considerations are outrageous.
prices on products and supplies have increased.
rent and realty have stayed the same or increased
customers need breaks for their own budgets due to all of the above on their own business or loss of income.

I might as well shut my business down as a small business
but hey that may be what this administration wants.
to fundamentally change america.

kill the small businessman
yeaahh whoop way to go. celebration time.
socialism here we come.

I dont expand because of all the above reasons ((and)) my legal and financial exposure would be too high if i had a bad season or one simple lawsuit from either a disgruntled employee looking for a way to not work or from damage they do to a clients of mines property.
 

musterion

Well-known member
I might as well shut my business down as a small business
but hey that may be what this administration wants.
to fundamentally change america.

kill the small businessman
yeaahh whoop way to go. celebration time.
socialism here we come.
That's been part of the goal for a long time -- destroy the social mobility the middle class represents. Surest way to do that is to "disincentivize" small business by any means necessary.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
i have small restoration business. pressure washing and such

firstly. If I have to pay $15 or more for new unproven employee I would have to raise my prices to customers.

I would have to invest much time in training entry level worker.

workmans comp has gone up considerably.

health insurance costs for employees have doubled since obamacare.

an incentive raise for good work and loyalty would be minimal if at all
being that i am near max for pay of blue collar work of this type.

As it is work has not gotten back to pre-2008 levels.

most of my clients want ((discounts)) due to their own low work or loss of job status.

I already give my new entry green horns $12/hr and my efficient and experienced workers $20/hr.

matching fica
regulations on small businesses have increased.
workmans comp considerations are outrageous.

prices on products and supplies have increased.
rent and realty have stayed the same or increased
customers need breaks for their own budgets due to all of the above on their own business or loss of income.

I might as well shut my business down as a small business
but hey that may be what this administration wants.
to fundamentally change america.

kill the small businessman
yeaahh whoop way to go. celebration time.
socialism here we come.

I dont expand because of all the above reasons ((and)) my legal and financial exposure would be too high if i had a bad season or one simple lawsuit from either a disgruntled employee looking for a way to not work or from damage they do to a clients of mines property.

The items I have highlighted above including many other government regulations have squelched small business to a crawl in the U.S., it is just sad. My neighbor has a water well drilling business and the government (State & federal) has just about broke his back with regulation, he is barely hanging on...liberals just don't get it, they have created the very environment that business cannot appease the government's ever expanding regulatory environment and be able to retain employees with high wages & benefits.
 

musterion

Well-known member
liberals just don't get it, they have created the very environment that business cannot appease the government's ever expanding regulatory environment and be able to retain employees with high wages & benefits.

Feature, not bug.
 

PureX

Well-known member
And somehow the Government will fix all this with regulation or mandate? I actually agree with your assessment of wage stagnation in this country, (the numbers prove it) while the net worth of these companies & their executives continues to rise but, outside of yet more government intrusion how can the tide be turned?
You call it "government intrusion". I call it the rule of commercial law. Why do you find it so outrageous that businesses should be controlled by law, to keep them from abusing and exploiting people just as people have to be controlled by laws to keep them from abusing and exploiting each other? After all, businesses are run by people. And those people are just as likely to abuse and exploit other people as anyone else is?

Why do you keep presuming that we have to maintain some sort of a "hands off" approach to commerce wherein the rules governing normal human interactions should not apply?
This is the biggest reason that companies & their execs are extending & retaining profits while paying virtually the same to their employees year after year. Here is an article from pew research that talks a bit about it.
No offense, but that's absurd. You're trying to claim that the reason business owners and investors have been keeping all the profits of the last 30 years for themselves instead of sharing them with their employees is because of government regulation??? C'mon! That's just silly. The reason they have been keeping all the profit for themselves is because they CAN. And if the government has had any part in that it's been by helping businesses bust unions, and by allowing businesses to exploit foreign labor with no repercussions.

Our government has sold the middle class out, to their corporate sponsored lobbyists and campaign contributors delight. And the middle class is being so exploited by them now that its being driven into a kind if working poverty.

And that's NOT because of "excessive government regulations". It's because there is an ongoing erosion of the effective governance of commerce protecting the middle and working classes from exploitation. The government has been corrupted by the same massive corporate profits that are being earned on the backs of middle class Americans, and then are being used to bribe politicians and keep the their wages stagnated.
 

musterion

Well-known member
No offense, but that's absurd. You're trying to claim that the reason business owners and investors have been keeping all the profits of the last 30 years for themselves instead of sharing them with their employees
Employees are entitled monetarily to nothing apart from the wage for their labor. Anything beyond that is the employer's prerogative and is not an entitlement.

You are such a communist droid.
 

Word based mystic

New member
limit monopolies.

corporations should not be able to lawyer to death new inventions.

small businesses have to have incentives beyond the monopolies or large corporations because they don't have the funds or manpower to lobby the government.

which the lobbyists then put more monetary and regulatory mandates to make it nearly impossible for small businesses to be profitable.

more than half of the employees in U.S. are small business employees.

If the monopolies make it impossible for small businesses to compete the unemployment rate will increase even more.
 

The Berean

Well-known member
:think:

Seattle’s $15 minimum wage law is supposed to lift workers out of poverty and move them off public assistance. But there may be a hitch in the plan.

Evidence is surfacing that some workers are asking their bosses for fewer hours as their wages rise – in a bid to keep overall income down so they don’t lose public subsidies for things like food, child care and rent.

Full Life Care, a home nursing nonprofit, told KIRO-TV in Seattle that several workers want to work less.

“If they cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the
$15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people,” said Jason Rantz, host of the Jason Rantz show on 97.3 KIRO-FM.

Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit
 

republicanchick

New member
:think
“If they cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the[/I] $15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people,” said Jason Rantz, host of the Jason Rantz show on 97.3 KIRO-FM.

-follow-suit/"]Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit[/URL]

the instinct would be to get on those people's case since they "want" 2 remain on assistance... but gov assistance gives one a sense of security, so I would guess that is what they want more than anything... They know that if they get kicked off assistance they will have to go through all that rigamorole to apply again if they are let go/fired/laid off, etc...

maybe society should just end that law about how u can be fired for NO reason...

that would give people more security... But then... I don't know.. it's like weighing the company owner's rights against the rights of the workers... I mean, you don't want to be the owner of a co,.and not be able to get rid of someone... But still... getting rid of a good worker for no reason is... not good... might want to get rid of you just b/c of your politics...


___
 

rexlunae

New member
:think:

Seattle’s $15 minimum wage law is supposed to lift workers out of poverty and move them off public assistance. But there may be a hitch in the plan.

Evidence is surfacing that some workers are asking their bosses for fewer hours as their wages rise – in a bid to keep overall income down so they don’t lose public subsidies for things like food, child care and rent.

Full Life Care, a home nursing nonprofit, told KIRO-TV in Seattle that several workers want to work less.

“If they cut down their hours to stay on those subsidies because the
$15 per hour minimum wage didn’t actually help get them out of poverty, all you’ve done is put a burden on the business and given false hope to a lot of people,” said Jason Rantz, host of the Jason Rantz show on 97.3 KIRO-FM.

Seattle sees fallout from $15 minimum wage, as other cities follow suit

Notice that they didn't mention how many workers are requesting reduced hours, or making any connection between actual receipt of public assistance and those who have requested reduced hours. Washington State has work requirements for food assistance, including that you don't voluntarily reduce your work hours. As long as people are following the rules, I guess I don't see a problem with this.

http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=388-400-0040
http://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=388-444-0005
 
Top