What's that they say about being careful what you wish for?


Seattle's first-in-the-nation $15 per hour minimum wage law is hurting the workers it aimed to help, a new study has found.

The working poor are making more per hour but taking home less pay. The University of Washington paper asserts the new wages boosted worker pay by 3 percent, but also resulted in a 9-percent reduction in hours and a $125 cut to the monthly paychecks.

The law also cost the city 5,000 jobs, the report said.

Seattle's minimum wage ordinance, passed by the Seattle City Council and signed by Mayor Ed Murray in 2014, was sold as a way to close the income inequality gap and help those struggling at the bottom of the economic ladder. More than a dozen cities and counties, mostly in California and New York, followed suit.

"This is a two-edged sword," said Jacob Vigdor, one of the team of researchers studying the issues for Seattle. "And if you raise this minimum wage the way Seattle did you run the risk of actually taking money away from the people you are trying to help."

The study was published as a "working paper" on Monday by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

A national campaign called "Fight for $15" aims to bring higher wages across the country by worker strikes and demonstrations.

The Seattle mayor tweeted his rebuttal of the study, and previously cited Seattle's growing economy and low unemployment as evidence that higher wages are not bad for the city.

"The facts: Seattle's economy is booming, with wages increasing & restaurants & retail among our fastest growing job sectors," he wrote on Twitter.

But Louise Chernin, CEO of the Greater Seattle Business Association, said jobs should be increasing at a higher rate.

"You'd think with the amount of people moving into Seattle and the number of businesses and restaurants that are opening, we'd be hiring more people," she said. "It just shows me they are struggling."

The study shows not everybody is struggling, however. Job growth in the city is strong, up 13 percent in the past year – but only for those making more than $19 per hour.


http://www.foxnews.com/politic...kers-study-says.html

We passed a minimum wage increase here in Arizona that went into effect January 1st.

Only thing it did here is raise prices everywhere and forced employers to eliminate some positions.

The rest of us it was equal to a pay cut and we all moved closer to the bottom.

Gee, never saw that coming ...

This is because minimum wage should have been $50/hour /sarc

Only $15? Why not make it $100 an hour so everyone who works 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year can gross $200k?

I'm no economist but does it really take one to figure out what the results of shit like this would be?

I can't believe this is the Washington Post's title for their more detailed story:

"A ‘very credible’ new study on Seattle’s $15 minimum wage has bad news for liberals"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...m_term=.8c6645b3a43c

I have a degree in economics but am not taking a position one way or the other.

What I do know is that is takes at least X number of people to operate, for example, a Subway restaurant at any point in time, regardless of what the wage is. So until they can reduce or eliminate the need for X number of human workers, either Subway prices will have to rise, or the profits will decline and the store will close as the owner/operator seeks a better return on his/her capital.

Just as they said it would.... Miccky D's just announce payment kiosks, in preparation to go cashier-less. No pimple faced teenagers to look at in there soon.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:
Only $15? Why not make it $100 an hour so everyone who works 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year can gross $200k?

I'm no economist but does it really take one to figure out what the results of shit like this would be?

Truth.

-----------------------------

Gee, you mean to say that gubbermint mandated minimum wage of $15 per hour didn't turn out so well for the workers and business? Whoodathunk that?

Of course Seattle is known for not being well gubberned. Lots of folks said what would happen, and it did.

But some liberal nitwit out there feels good and that is all the matters to the (D).

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:
"And if you raise this minimum wage the way Seattle did you run the risk of actually taking money away from the people you are trying to help."

So, they are just figuring that out, huh. Obviously, never read any economics books or studied economic history.

The Seattle city council doesn't care. Agenda accomplished. We also have a devout socialist in the city council too. A real wack job.
As mentioned on an earlier post, things like food and rent are going up. Everybody wants that extra money. Which means at the end of the day, no realized pay raise at all. The council did this partly to keep themselves at their current positions longer.
Now the latest idea is an income tax for those that work in the city of Seattle making more than $200,000 a year. If passed, they could eventually go after everyone.

They were warned about this but did not believe. I did a college paper/model on this subject 50 years ago, and it looks like the laws of economics have not changed.

quote:

Originally posted by Sailor1911:

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:
"And if you raise this minimum wage the way Seattle did you run the risk of actually taking money away from the people you are trying to help."

So, they are just figuring that out, huh. Obviously, never read any economics books or studied economic history.

They don't have any common sense!

quote:

Originally posted by Sailor1911:


Obviously, never read any economics books or studied economic history.

Those were business courses and no lefty would be caught dead taking one. Now they feel competent to make decisions that impact business because their little minds weren't tarnished with information.

It's almost as if....there are economic Laws or something?

quote:

Originally posted by nojoy:
Now the latest idea is an income tax for those that work in the city of Seattle making more than $200,000 a year. If passed, they could eventually go after everyone.

Sawant is a piece of filth, and the tax they keep touting as a "progressive tax" on the radio makes me shout at them in my car on the awful commute through the shitty I5 traffic every day. They're doing their absolute level best to be the best, most lefy-left progressives they can be in Seattle, and it's a shame. Because it doesn't work. Without all these loony fucking people, it would be kind of a nice place to live. It really would.

^^She really needs to go back to India. But that won't happen.

quote:

Originally posted by nojoy:
Now the latest idea is an income tax for those that work in the city of Seattle making more than $200,000 a year. If passed, they could eventually go after everyone.

So if they do pass this, how many executives will take a pay cut to $199,999.99 a year with a really nice benefits package? Or how many businesses will just move over an imaginary line on the map to the next municipality?

Econ 101. However, progressives don't much care for proven theory or sciences in general.