Little impact in SeaTac from $15 minimum wage

originally posted by: CB328

How could it ever keep up with inflation

It definitely won't if you never raise it, obviously. What you really mean is you don't care if they make enough money to live or not.

When was minimum wage ever consider a "living wage" It is a starting wage for the lowest of the low jobs that take zero skill and education to accomplished. It is also the wage that all other hourly wages are based on, so it is more of a starting point than anything else.

If you are 30 and trying to raise a family on a minimum wage job there are many other issues with that than minimum wage is too low.

originally posted by: bigx001
minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, if it had it would be much higher than $15 an hour.

but for any increase in minimum wage to be worthwhile there needs to be hard rent control or at least sensible landlords, otherwise any increase will be consumed by greedy landlords.

Why should it be much higher...

Here is a fact... In 1966 the minimum wage was the highest compared to inflation, so if we raised minimum wage up to that standard it would be $10.90. Right now Washington is at $9.47, so a $1.50 per hour more would put it higher compared to inflation than any other time in our history, so where does your much higher than $15 come from?

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: bigx001
minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, if it had it would be much higher than $15 an hour.

but for any increase in minimum wage to be worthwhile there needs to be hard rent control or at least sensible landlords, otherwise any increase will be consumed by greedy landlords.

How could it ever keep up with inflation since raising it will cause inflation?

Cost of wages go up. Prices go up.

Want to think this through and try to explain how it would work?

Prices go up every year even though wages haven't budged from poverty level in years. So no, higher wages do not cause higher prices.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Where does your information come from?

If we dont have an economic system by which a fair's days pay is earned by a fair day's work then we clearly dont have a system that works.

The economic system we have runs "successfully" by bankrupting the poor and the only time we complain about it is when the middle classes are effected.

You know were living on a planet with a total population that continues to boom boom boom? Capitalism has had its time, we need to engineer a system to prepare for the world that we are heading into. Resources MUST be shared. Ingenuity MUST be sought and the idea of being worth more than someone else MUST be buried in the ground.

You cannot rely on capitalism to cope with a system that require's cooperation and emotion. You cant rely on global corporations to do the right thing's in order for humanity to cope and prosper. Lastly, you currently cannot rely on governments's to take charge and work together to help humanity survive and prosper without f**king up the world in the process.

Things need to change.

originally posted by: onequestion

Where does your information come from?

Google is your friend. It is not like anything dealing with inflation or minimum wage is not 2 clicks away. Here is an easy chart of comparison.

originally posted by: doobydoll

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: bigx001
minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, if it had it would be much higher than $15 an hour.

but for any increase in minimum wage to be worthwhile there needs to be hard rent control or at least sensible landlords, otherwise any increase will be consumed by greedy landlords.

How could it ever keep up with inflation since raising it will cause inflation?

Cost of wages go up. Prices go up.

Want to think this through and try to explain how it would work?

Prices go up every year even though wages haven't budged from poverty level in years. So no, higher wages do not cause higher prices.

As another poster said, Google is your friend.

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
If we dont have an economic system by which a fair's days pay is earned by a fair day's work then we clearly dont have a system that works.

The economic system we have runs "successfully" by bankrupting the poor and the only time we complain about it is when the middle classes are effected.

You know were living on a planet with a total population that continues to boom boom boom? Capitalism has had its time, we need to engineer a system to prepare for the world that we are heading into. Resources MUST be shared. Ingenuity MUST be sought and the idea of being worth more than someone else MUST be buried in the ground.

You cannot rely on capitalism to cope with a system that require's cooperation and emotion. You cant rely on global corporations to do the right thing's in order for humanity to cope and prosper. Lastly, you currently cannot rely on governments's to take charge and work together to help humanity survive and prosper without f**king up the world in the process.

Things need to change.

Yes, we have a fair system.

Somebody offers you a job and offers to pay you. You accept their offer, or go work for somebody else offering another job.

If you're industrious, you can start your own business, and then you can offer other people jobs and pay them whatever you want.

But be careful, if you pay them too much, your profits will be cut. Pay them too little, and they will leave and work for somebody else.

What could be more fair than that?

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
If we dont have an economic system by which a fair's days pay is earned by a fair day's work then we clearly dont have a system that works.

Fair works both ways. Do you pay a babysitter 15 bucks an hour to watch your kid for lets say 5 hours? I guess we need to figure out what is fair or we will get to the point that jobs are just not there anymore. You might be willing to pay some kid 30 bucks to baby sit but maybe not 75 bucks so you just do not go out and the kid has zero opportunities. The typical ratio for a successful business is employee cost do not exceed 36% of cost. Can businesses that pay minimum wage and still push the 36% pay any more?

originally posted by: Jamie1

Yes, we have a fair system.

Somebody offers you a job and offers to pay you. You accept their offer, or go work for somebody else offering another job.

I don't know what kind of world your living in but i can assure you, we do not have a "fair" system and we haven't had one for many decades. If a basic job does not allow you make ends meet without a small portion of disposable income for investment/savings then no the system is not working.

If you're industrious, you can start your own business, and then you can offer other people jobs and pay them whatever you want.

Banks don't like lending to people who want to set up a new business without a pound in their pocket. Taxes to the government for setting up a new business are extortionate and complicated. Education cost's you the price of a mortgage deposit and many will spend their whole lives paying it back. Even if you do get the degree, who's to say there is a job waiting for you at the end of it?

The easy solution here is to make a fairer society. We do that by regulating capitalism and ensuring that people are paid FAIRLY.

But be careful, if you pay them too much, your profits will be cut. Pay them too little, and they will leave and work for somebody else.

What could be more fair than that?

The trouble here is ideology. You THINK that a CEO deserves to make 300x more than the bottom person in the company, but you cant tell me HOW the CEO has earned 300x more because all you know is that its the "right" outcome, as capitalist ideology has brainwashed you into thinking.

You are defending a system that is raping the planet of its resources and creating war's through greed.
Capitalism does not work.

Humanity must evolve and its economic system must evolve with it.

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

Humanity must evolve and its economic system must evolve with it.

Do you have a name for this system?

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

The trouble here is ideology. You THINK that a CEO deserves to make 300x more than the bottom person in the company, but you cant tell me HOW the CEO has earned 300x more because all you know is that its the "right" outcome, as capitalist ideology has brainwashed you into thinking.

It sounds to me like you think the same thing, only you think it about the bottom people in the company should get paid more, not the CEO. How is that any different?
There is no "should" when it comes to payment except that people "should" get paid what they agreed to work for.

As for your solution, it isn't *easy.* If you pay people to redistribute wealth, you end up paying administrators to do nothing but shuffle money around. That doesn't create anything useful (like cell phones, watches, or cars) so you make the country poorer as a whole by doing so. If instead of pushing money around those people worked in, say, agriculture, more food would be produced, making the price of food cheaper, thus reducing the cost of minimum wage and letting people make ends meet easier. (Just an example.)

IMHO, part of the problem is the crazy amount of oversight at all levels of society. Some oversight is good, but when you have a lot of people doing nothing but managing, watching, and overseeing the people who are actually harvesting crops, mining gold, producing cars. Those people all need crops, gold, cars, etc, and because there are not a lot of producers, prices rise because stuff is scarce.

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: Jamie1

Yes, we have a fair system.

Somebody offers you a job and offers to pay you. You accept their offer, or go work for somebody else offering another job.

I don't know what kind of world your living in but i can assure you, we do not have a "fair" system and we haven't had one for many decades. If a basic job does not allow you make ends meet without a small portion of disposable income for investment/savings then no the system is not working.

Until fairly recently, "having a job" wasn't really even a thing. You may make personal contracts for exchange of services, but having someone paying you as per modern employment law...that is pretty new. Claiming that life isn't fair because a system isn't fair seems like screaming at the wall to me. It feels defeatist.

RE: other posts in this thread....economy and payrate are not a mutually exclusive deal. Payrate effects economy, and economy effects payrate. But neither requires the other to change.

To ask why lowering minimum wage to $0.02 wouldn't create an economic boom is zero sum thinking.

Something to consider: "the system" is what keeps you from being able to negotiate a higher wage based on your own notion of what your skill/expertise is. Sure, you may get some negotiating power in some private sector jobs, once you have achieved a certain level of management experience. But try negotiating your pay rate as an RN trying to work at a government hospital. "The system" is what holds intelligent people down. Its geared toward protecting corporate interests.

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

originally posted by: Jamie1

Yes, we have a fair system.

Somebody offers you a job and offers to pay you. You accept their offer, or go work for somebody else offering another job.

I don't know what kind of world your living in but i can assure you, we do not have a "fair" system and we haven't had one for many decades. If a basic job does not allow you make ends meet without a small portion of disposable income for investment/savings then no the system is not working.

If you're industrious, you can start your own business, and then you can offer other people jobs and pay them whatever you want.

Banks don't like lending to people who want to set up a new business without a pound in their pocket. Taxes to the government for setting up a new business are extortionate and complicated. Education cost's you the price of a mortgage deposit and many will spend their whole lives paying it back. Even if you do get the degree, who's to say there is a job waiting for you at the end of it?

The easy solution here is to make a fairer society. We do that by regulating capitalism and ensuring that people are paid FAIRLY.

But be careful, if you pay them too much, your profits will be cut. Pay them too little, and they will leave and work for somebody else.

What could be more fair than that?

The trouble here is ideology. You THINK that a CEO deserves to make 300x more than the bottom person in the company, but you cant tell me HOW the CEO has earned 300x more because all you know is that its the "right" outcome, as capitalist ideology has brainwashed you into thinking.

You are defending a system that is raping the planet of its resources and creating war's through greed.
Capitalism does not work.

Humanity must evolve and its economic system must evolve with it.

You're complaining the system isn't fair while you've made 2,768 posts on ATS.

Maybe if you spent your time actually adding value to others instead of wasting it whining you could see some positive financial results.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

Humanity must evolve and its economic system must evolve with it.

Do you have a name for this system?

I do not, it doesn't even exist yet but it must be system that had moral responsibility build into it instead of just the "supply and demand beats all"

Can you imagine if economies around the world worked together to better the human race and clean up the planet?

We should be demanding it. Instead many people choose to defend greed and act like there's no alternative.

a reply to: Jamie1

Your last post kind of gave me a bad flavor in my mouth.

gross.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Something to consider: "the system" is what keeps you from being able to negotiate a higher wage based on your own notion of what your skill/expertise is. Sure, you may get some negotiating power in some private sector jobs, once you have achieved a certain level of management experience. But try negotiating your pay rate as an RN trying to work at a government hospital. "The system" is what holds intelligent people down. Its geared toward protecting corporate interests.

Even in the private sector there are pay bands per skill. If lets say a level 2 pay band is 50 to 70k, as a manager I'm not going to fill those positions at 70k, but closer to 50k unless I can not find quality help in the 50k range, and this does happen. If I receive 30 resumes and pick the top 8 from phone interviews and then pick 3 to hire, if all three will not take the job for under 60k then my choices is to go with a lessor candidate or offer 60k+ which is still in my pay band. After all that work I would typically go with the high offer than pick a lower scored candidate.

When you say Government anything, you are not talking about the brightest getting top dollar. That is why the best do not typically work a Government job since they can do much better in the private sector. On the other hand Government money is still a good wage, and in many cases better than what some would get in the private sector. I made more money as an E9 in the Air Force than I do now as a Manager for a private company (Boeing).

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc

Can you imagine if economies around the world worked together to better the human race and clean up the planet?

We should be demanding it. Instead many people choose to defend greed and act like there's no alternative.

Your system sounds like Star Trek after replicators are invented. A time when you can replicate anything so you work for just the personal satisfaction and not money.

I do not defend greed. I defend a person's right to make whatever they can whether it is 15,000 a year or 15 billion. Neither really affects me for I work hard to make my own and I am not obligated to anyone but my own family, and no one is obligated to me.

For me, to complain about a person who made 1 billion and is greedy, not giving it back to employees etc Is just as fair for me to complain about the person who only makes 15,000. That they didn't do their best in school, didn't make the right choices in life, didn't do all they could to not become dependent on society.

As in both cases both people created their lives just as I have mine, so they got to live with what they create, good or bad, I do.

You'd think from the government perspective raising minimum would have a positive effect. It does a double-whammy of raising the tax base while also dropping the number of people eligible for government aid. (If you're employed, you really shouldn't neeed it.) And then there's less needed in number of aid or social workers and handling of bureucratic paper work. Overall cost to everyone as a whole is probably about the same, it's just that some companies can't externalize their operating costs onto the government and taxpayer's dollar anymore.

originally posted by: StalkerSolent
It sounds to me like you think the same thing, only you think it about the bottom people in the company should get paid more, not the CEO. How is that any different?
There is no "should" when it comes to payment except that people "should" get paid what they agreed to work for.

No i dont believe that two people in the same company should have a pay difference of 300x. What i believe is that a cleaner should make enough money to make ends meet and have a small amount of disposable income for savings & investments. We've had a society successfully run with that in mind. By paying the CEO a ridiculous amount of money you're indirectly having an negative effect on society as a whole.
When you have a society full of poor people crime rockets. They find other ways to make money which again in turn has a negative effect on society. It makes much more sense to pay a basic wage that people can live on, no?

As for your solution, it isn't *easy.* If you pay people to redistribute wealth, you end up paying administrators to do nothing but shuffle money around. That doesn't create anything useful (like cell phones, watches, or cars) so you make the country poorer as a whole by doing so. If instead of pushing money around those people worked in, say, agriculture, more food would be produced, making the price of food cheaper, thus reducing the cost of minimum wage and letting people make ends meet easier. (Just an example.)

Well, enough politicians have been paid very well to redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich over the past 50 years. We can easily reverse that with high taxation of the wealthy. Build more social housing, remove university fee's and provide incentives for people to gain skill's in needed in future technologies. They are only a few ways we can move forward positively.

IMHO, part of the problem is the crazy amount of oversight at all levels of society. Some oversight is good, but when you have a lot of people doing nothing but managing, watching, and overseeing the people who are actually harvesting crops, mining gold, producing cars. Those people all need crops, gold, cars, etc, and because there are not a lot of producers, prices rise because stuff is scarce.

Indeed, but i see that capitalism on a nation by nation basis can take humanity no further. I suppose in some way i am proposing that countries give up their economic sovereignty and work together - That's a scary and almost crazy idea i know, but if it worked... technological advancement would go through the roof if done correctly.

Obviously we cant have this cooperative system in place if the main focus is making money.

As long as we ensure that making money is the ONLY reason for business then really were shooting all 7 billion members of the human race in the foot. That's a lot of feet lol.