Posted by Tina
Fast food workers were out in force across America this week. Well, union-organized back up volunteers and a few fast food workers were out in force. Anyhoo…the protesters wanted to be sure it was well understood that they would not work for less than $15.00 an hour.
Do they really think standing at a counter taking orders and making change is a career…and worth $15,00 an hour? Most people who work these jobs move on within two years. They take these jobs to learn some skills and gain experience.
As Investors.com points out, this is an industry “that pays out an estimated 70% of revenue to workers”. They estimate that “hundreds of thousands” would lose their jobs if the industry raised wages to $15.00 an hour. It makes perfect sense; a business cannot sustain itself if it has to pay out more than 70% of revenue to workers. Moreover, bad news already looms on the horizon:
It’s already happening in Europe, where it costs a lot to hire a worker, McDonald’s has installed 7,000 new ATM-style machines that take orders and payments. No muss, no fuss, no arguments, no misunderstandings — and no minimum wage at all. Just a one-time cost for the machine, plus maintenance.
As ObamaCare raises the cost of labor for fast-food chains, and with talk of a doubling of wages, look for the same equipment to be used here too. And it won’t just be ATMs.
Momentum Machines, a San Francisco-based high-tech company, has created the Alpha, a robot that can make up to 360 hamburgers in an hour — and pays for itself in a year.
No training, no retraining, and excuses for missing work.
Ignorance…as Investors writes, economic ignorance…will cause these people to destroy not only their own stepping stone jobs but those of a lot of others.
We’ve seen this movie before.
In the 1970’s Jimmy Carter’s lousy economy caused energy shortages and high gasoline prices. The only way forward for gas station owners was to go self-serve (which later morphed into automated self-serve). In the process hundreds of thousands of teen-aged boys and young men lost their jobs.
One might argue that the automation changes in the fast food industry would eventually happen anyway. True enough, but how stupid is it to choose this moment, when the employment situation for young people is already horrible? The business owner, finding himself the target of a wage based food fight, cannot accommodate his workers and continue to offer the public low priced meals. Somethings going to go and it won’t be the customers.
CORRECTION
smallbusiness.com points out that food and employee costs are often lumped together in the industry because they represent the biggest cost f doing business:
The food and beverage industry is unforgiving when it comes to making a profit. Margins in the industry are thin in comparison to less capital- and labor-intensive industries. Some estimates placed food and labor expenses as a percentage of sales as high as 75 percent. This is a very high number, leaving management very little room for error.
According to the Restaurant Report website, labor costs in the food and beverage industry account for 22 to 40 percent of total sales. In other words, for every $1 in sales, a restaurant spends up to 40 cents in labor costs. Coupled with food costs, some industry trade groups places these costs at 50 to 75 percent of sales. (Emphasis mine)
The Moron Media marched in lockstep with SEIU to promote the recent fast-food workers “strike.”
And employers who don’t want to put up with the strikers shenanigans can always do what Ronald Reagan did to the air traffic controllers and what Major League Baseball did to striking umpires,
Not a business owner anymore and writing paychecks is a job, too. There are lots of folks out there who are willing to work rather than strike for an unbelievable wage.
Tina: “Do they really think standing at a counter taking orders and making change is a career…and worth $15,00 an hour?”
It’s not a career, but if we factor in inflation and increases in worker productivity since 1968, then yes, what they are doing is actually worth more than $15/hr. The best estimates show that if the minimum wage kept up with inflation and worker productivity gains, it would be about $22/hr today.
If you think their jobs aren’t worth this, then you must also believe that minimum wage workers in 1968 were drastically overpaid.
I’m not saying the min. wage should be raised that high right away. I’m saying that we have a lot to make up for, and we need to start somewhere. We can’t have a healthy economy if the value of the min. wage continues falling.
Chris: “The best estimates show that if the minimum wage kept up with inflation and worker productivity gains, it would be about $22/hr today.”
Inflation affects the cost of doing business. So far inflation, along with the growing costs of government regulation and tax policy, has helped to create a situation where employee compensation represents 70% of revenues for these businesses.
The truth is fast food restaurants aren’t our parents. They have zero obligation to supply a living to any person.
They do have work to offer the public. No one will be forced to take the jobs they offer. If there are people who are willing to work at the rate that is offered there is no reason those people should be denied the job. Those who want more pay should seek employment elsewhere. If better skills are required then they must find a way to acquire those skills.
“If you think their jobs aren’t worth this, then you must also believe that minimum wage workers in 1968 were drastically overpaid.”
No Chris. I think circumstances change. I think we live in a free country and people need to be responsible for improving their circumstances through a means other than government or union coercion and force. I think a job is worth what a business is willing to pay and an employee is willing to take.
“I’m saying that we have a lot to make up for…”
I’m sure the owners of those fast food franchisees will welcome your contribution when it comes time for you to pony up to pay their bills. “We” suggests that you have a stake in this little exercise. I suggest that until “you” have your own personal money on the line “you” should stay out of it.
“We can’t have a healthy economy if the value of the min. wage continues falling.”
It should fall to zero! The government should not be determining wages. People should learn to negotiate wages for themselves. The actual value of work will only be determined in this way. People should never be denied jobs because government has forced wages higher and in the process eliminated jobs in the market.
Raising wages artificially IS inflationary. Employee cost is a business expense, usually the biggest expense. When expenses go up so do the prices for the goods we buy. We all end up paying more and nobody gets ahead.
Minimum wage jobs are not the way to mark or measure upward mobility. It is stupid to imagine that we can improve upward mobility by increasing, particularly doubling, the minimum wage. It will result in lost jobs and higher prices both of which will do nothing for upward mobility.
Progressive arguments regarding inflation are false arguments that offer empty promises.
The American people need more entry level jobs not less. The American people need to see the burdens on businesses decreased not increased.
Upward mobility will result through self-improvement, work, and savings/investment. Most people begin this journey with at least one entry level position. Sacrifice in the beginning is low wages in exchange for opportunity and experience…it’s a bargain to those who understand the game.
Unfortunately we are teaching young people that a job is a building where you go to collect money and government is a body that forces people in that building to periodically give you more just for showing up.
America will never have a healthy economy with this vapidly ignorant understanding of how to get ahead in life.
When entry level pay is raised all employment above entry must also increase. some union contracts actually include language to do just that automatically. there is a reason unions push for raising minimum wage…it means increased wages for all union workers…and more money in union coffers.
Tina: “Inflation affects the cost of doing business. So far inflation, along with the growing costs of government regulation and tax policy, has helped to create a situation where employee compensation represents 70% of revenues for these businesses.”
I will have to see evidence to back this up before taking you at your word. I Googled the 70% figure but all I could find were references to the same article from IBD, which is a notoriously unreliable source.
I would also need to know how much this industry has historically paid its workers. You claim that all these factors have caused the fast food industry to pay its workers 70% of revenues, but you don’t provide any figure to compare that to. How much of its revenues did this industry pay its workers in 1968, for instance?
“The truth is fast food restaurants aren’t our parents. They have zero obligation to supply a living to any person.”
So employers have no obligation to their employers? I wouldn’t want to work for you.
“No one will be forced to take the jobs they offer.”
Hopelessly naive. Have you actually spoken with any unemployed or underemployed people lately? I have, and trust me, there are many people out there who feel they are being “forced” to take low-paying jobs, because they need to work and can’t afford to be picky in this economy. Contrary to what you believe, most poor Americans are willing to work. It’s just that well-paying work is hard to find. To strike at all in these circumstances is brave.
“Those who want more pay should seek employment elsewhere.”
Yes, because it’s so easy to find another job! “Let’s just go to the job store where jobs grow on jobbies!”
“If better skills are required then they must find a way to acquire those skills.”
But they have. You know that they have. Minimum wage earners today are more educated than they were in the past as well as more productive. And they’re making less. You’re really OK with that? That’s the American dream to you?
“No Chris.”
Yes, Tina, if you actually derived your beliefs from logic, that is what you would have to conclude. Here’s a simple proof:
1) Fast-food workers today are not worth paying more than the current minimum wage
2) Fast-food workers today are more productive, older, and more educated than in 1968
3) Fast-food workers today make less than fast-food workers in 1968
4) Therefore, fast-food workers in 1968 were not worth the pay they received.
Is there a step I’m missing here? I don’t think so. I think you don’t want to admit to the logical implications of your own arguments, because they are politically inconvenient and cause cognitive dissonance. You cannot logically believe that today’s min. wage workers aren’t worth a pay increase without also believing that 1968’s minimum wage workers weren’t worth the pay they actually received. If you only hold one of the beliefs and not the other, than your beliefs are not internally consistent.
“I think circumstances change. I think we live in a free country and people need to be responsible for improving their circumstances through a means other than government or union coercion and force.”
Unions are a natural part of the free market and are no more inherently “coercive” than corporations. Furthermore, the health of unions is directly tied to the health of the middle class as you can easily see here:
The union membership rate has been falling for decades and is now at a historical low, so it is time for you to stop blaming unions for everything. If anything, the decline in union power is partially responsible for our poor economic health.
“I think a job is worth what a business is willing to pay and an employee is willing to take.”
And if you refuse to consider the various factors that make employees “willing” to take low-paying jobs, then you’re seeing the issue through tunnel vision.
“I’m sure the owners of those fast food franchisees will welcome your contribution when it comes time for you to pony up to pay their bills. “We” suggests that you have a stake in this little exercise.”
You actually just said that minimum wage workers don’t have a “stake” in the minimum wage debate. That is idiotic and callous. You constantly act like the poor corporations are so put-upon and express no sympathy or even awareness of the problems of low-wage employees. Mr. Burns would be proud. You are a walking, talking caricature of an uncaring business owner who sees employees as nothing but numbers and can only empathize with other business owners.
“I suggest that until “you” have your own personal money on the line “you” should stay out of it.”
You actually just said that minimum wage workers have no personal money on the line! Can you get any dumber?
“It should fall to zero!”
Radical, ridiculous, and stupid.
“It will result in lost jobs and higher prices both of which will do nothing for upward mobility.”
Again, the most reliable and recent economic evidence shows otherwise. But you don’t care about evidence that doesn’t fit your point of view.
“Upward mobility will result through self-improvement, work, and savings/investment.”
Naive, stupid, and naive.
1. “Self-improvement.” As you already know, min. wage workers have already tried “self-improvement.” Min. wage workers are more educated and more skilled today than any time in the past. IT HASN’T HELPED. Their wages have actually gone down. You have never once addressed this fact. It’s convenient for you to pretend that low-wage workers just need to work harder and get more education and then they’ll make more money, so if you acknowledged the fact that they are doing that and somehow making less money, your entire argument would collapse.
2. “work.” Did you miss the part where we are talking about minimum wage *workers?*
3. “savings/investment.” Excuse me while I laugh in your face. Save *what?* After regular living expenses for the average minimum wage worker, there’s nothing left to save.
“Most people begin this journey with at least one entry level position.”
In your day entry level positions paid more than entry level positions today. You are literally arguing that Americans today should not have the same structural advantages you did. That is monstrous.
“Sacrifice in the beginning is low wages in exchange for opportunity and experience…it’s a bargain to those who understand the game.”
The “game” has changed since your day, Tina. It is now rigged against workers in a way that it wasn’t when you were starting out.
“Unfortunately we are teaching young people that a job is a building where you go to collect money and government is a body that forces people in that building to periodically give you more just for showing up.”
Bullshit. Again, this generation’s min. wage workers are *harder working* than yours, as worker productivity data shows. Don’t you dare insult us like that. You have no clue what you’re talking about.
“When entry level pay is raised all employment above entry must also increase.”
Yes, that’s what’s called a “win-win” scenario. Wages need to increase pretty much across the board to keep up with historical levels.
Forgot to link to the graph:
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/Screen%20Shot%202012-06-07%20at%2012.16.34%20PM.png
Wow Chris! Where did you learn to think like this. Your argument is completely lacking in logic and common sense. OK, lets raise the minimum wage to $15.00 and we will watch an increase in the closing of businesses and an increase in the people standing in the unemployment line. Lets do it and make every city in the country another Detroit!
Hey thanks for weighing in MCS…you keep posting comments like that and someone’s bound to accuse you of living up to your name!
Wasn’t one of the stores that got protested in Detroit?
By golly, it was!
More Common Sense: “Wow Chris! Where did you learn to think like this. Your argument is completely lacking in logic and common sense.”
Care to explain? Since you didn’t point to any specific part of my comment, I have no way to respond to this accusation. If my arguments are so clearly lacking in logic and common sense, you should be able to explain why, in specific terms. I try to be very specific in my comments and show the logic in my thinking (I even provided a proof in my last comment!) and it’s pretty rude and lazy to respond to that with the equivalent of “lol your dumb.” Put some effort into it.
“OK, lets raise the minimum wage to $15.00 and we will watch an increase in the closing of businesses and an increase in the people standing in the unemployment line.”
I clearly said that I don’t believe the minimum wage should be raised to $15 right away. So not only did you fail to make any meaningful response to my comments, you failed at actually reading them. Nice job, little buddy!
Tina: “Hey thanks for weighing in MCS…you keep posting comments like that and someone’s bound to accuse you of living up to your name!”
I’m always amused by what you and Jack view as quality comments. It never has to do with the substance of the argument (which MCS’s comment contained none of), but whether or not the poster in question agrees with you. Even when a comment is unambiguously racist (such as Toby’s last week) you will respond with compliments and praise as long as the commenter is on your side of a given argument. Commenting on Post Scripts is beginning to feel more and more like accidentally disrupting a circle jerk.
If we could somehow put all of Chris’ hot air to work, we wouldn’t have an energy problem . . . .
Chris just because you choose to pretend that the loss of entry level jobs and/or the closing of businesses is irrelevant or unworthy of consideration as a “quality comment(s)” doesn’t make it so. Both of those things are KEY points!
“More Common Sense” made perfect sense when he wrote that it is “lacking in logic and common sense” to believe that forcefully raising the minimum wage is smart or that it wouldn’t do more harm than good for low wage workers overall.
And Chris…your participation here is appreciated but your constant need to evaluate and instruct is boring and tiresome.
You are a died in the wool participant in the biggest, most organized circle jerk to ever come down the pike in America…you are the spawn and member in good standing in the radical left, community organizer oriented, Marxist-grounded Democrat Party.
We know who you are and you know who we are so what is the problem?
I was simply welcoming a new voice to our discussion. I think, if you are willing to tell the truth, you will recall that I have also welcomed commenter’s that have agreed with you.
I’ll ignore the continuing racist charge…its one of the boring and tiresome circle jerk themes you employ for the party’s source of power. Disgusting!
Adolescents will be dragged by the nose. (Yes I will meet you jab for jab. As my kids found out you can’t win at this game with me. For one thing you will probably mature…eventually…and see the community organizers for who they are…not your friend)
“The organization of Circle jerk Liberal Politics” A political good old boys club founded on a circular exchange of mutual backslappers where hypothesis about whatever is known or supposed about something are discussed and nothing of value is produced.
Chris: “I will have to see evidence to back this up before taking you at your word. I Googled the 70% figure”
See the updated correction at the bottom of the article. Apparently the food and labor costs are 70 to 75% of revenue…those in business and investment understand this when discussing costs. My error and possibly Investors too. The fact that it represents food costs too doesn’t change the challenge to franchisees if wages are forced up.
Tina: “Chris just because you choose to pretend that the loss of entry level jobs and/or the closing of businesses is irrelevant or unworthy of consideration as a “quality comment(s)” doesn’t make it so. Both of those things are KEY points!”
Except that I pointed out in my comment that the most recent and reliable studies show no job loss or business closures as a result of the min. wage. MCS did not respond to that information or offer any counter-argument, he simply repeated a tired, disproven talking point and ignored information brought up by the person he was attempting to engag. That’s why his was not a quality comment.
““More Common Sense” made perfect sense when he wrote that it is “lacking in logic and common sense” to believe that forcefully raising the minimum wage is smart or that it wouldn’t do more harm than good for low wage workers overall”
No, because–and I know you really, fundamentally do not understand this, but try and pay attention–merely asserting something that you want to believe does not make something true. You need to actually show some valid evidence to back up your assertion that raising the minimum wage would hurt workers and the economy.
“I’ll ignore the continuing racist charge…”
Ignore it at your own peril. Toby LITERALLY argued that white people should be afraid of and stay away from black people. Just because you choose to ignore that does not make it go away and it does not make it any less racist. Your party has a racism problem. Your party intentionally drove away blacks from the party for decades as a political strategy, because they did not want the Republican party associated with black people. That is simply a fact. I know you believe that ignoring facts you don’t like makes them go away, but you are wrong. You have two options: acknowledge the problem and attempt to deal with it, or your party will die.
Don’t believe everything linked, far too often agendas on the Internet are confused with ‘gospel truth’. This blog more closely represents opinions based on life’s experiences, which has been proven more so than the ideology of youthful hyperbole. Tina and Jack keeping it real
Living rent free in the brain of Chris is about as boring as it gets. Hip deep in bong water and antidepressants, buddy, pal, please for the love of god throw me a bone here and have an original thought.
Chris: ”So employers have no obligation to their employers? I wouldn’t want to work for you.”
Then you are an idiot. You have no idea how I treat my employees because you don’t understand why I, or anyone else would hire someone.
I said employers have no “obligation”. Parents are obligated to care for and provide for their children whether they realize it or not. In our low moral society there are a lot of people who don’t but that doesn’t mean the obligation isn’t there.
I did not say they should treat employees as slaves. Given your attitude, I wouldn’t want to hire you.
People who believe that businesses exist just to provide for employees don’t have a clue about their own value. We see these people in fast food a lot. They look bored or distracted. They seem preoccupied with personal concerns. They treat the customer like he’s an annoyance. They show up only because they want the paycheck. The boss OWES them.
People start a business for many reasons but number one had better be making a profit because without that the business will not go forward for another year and there will be no opportunity to grow and expand. If enough of that happens jobs go away. those who want a job, particularly a first job, would be wise to understand this; they are expendable. There is always someone else coming along who wants a job….it’s worse when the economy sucks…like now…under 5.5 years (plus two) of Democrat policy.
“Hopelessly naive. Have you actually spoken with any unemployed or underemployed people lately? I have, and trust me, there are many people out there who feel they are being “forced” to take low-paying jobs”
Idiot! What the hell do you think is causing the lack of jobs? Since you refuse to learn you still do not know. You have a we vs them mentality that pits you against the only people that will or can actually give you a good job! You support the party that DESTROYS opportunity! My God you are thick sculled!
“Contrary to what you believe, most poor Americans are willing to work.”
Stupid, stupid person! You haven’t a clue about what I believe. You have an attitude of resentment and hatred toward the boss, the man, that guy that has what you percieve as an unfair advantage. That is keeping you from learning vital skills that could uplift you and others.
(God I hate this kind of ignorance.)
“It’s just that well-paying work is hard to find. To strike at all in these circumstances is brave.”
To strike in these circumstances is to be ignorant about what will bring opportunity. To strike in this instance is to be a slave to the union boss who is keeping you ignorant and only using the worker for power, position, and great big piles of cash.
“Minimum wage earners today are more educated than they were in the past as well as more productive.”
And because we have an administration without a clue (or bent on destroying America) they are taking jobs away from low skilled workers. You should be ashamed not proud…and certainly not resentful…you helped elect these economic morons.
“You’re really OK with that? That’s the American dream to you?”
Still acting the idiot. I have told you what would happen under progressive Democrat economic policy and we are living it. I have told you what has happened with conservative policies under both Democrat and Republican presidents and you still refuse to get it! You don’t care about the American dream. You care about defending idiots! Why?
“Is there a step I’m missing here?”
YES! The fast food product has a pricing limit! No matter what there is a limit after which the business is no longer fast food. Do you really think poor people, or anyone, looking to buy fast cheap food is going to pay a lot more without the added benefit of sitting down, being waited on, and enjoying a nicer atmosphere? Can you think at all? Do you believe money grows on trees? Do you care at all about the business owners ability to stay in business?
All your logic may fit in the book world, Chris, but in the real world in terms of entry level jobs…particularly those in fast food…it does not translate!
“Unions are a natural part of the free market and are no more inherently “coercive” than corporations.”
Natural? No. They are a construct of progressivism. They use the same principles and methods (for power) as progressive political organizations. They operate on the basis of we/they. They contract for a herd of people, rather than the skill and value of the individual, which is the free market. they use intimidation and (Democrats) government as tools of intimidation and oppression.
I can’t wait to hear how corporations “coerce” people. Please, enlighten me.
And while you are at it please notice you have moved from small franchisee store owner to corporate monster. Fast food employees are not paid by the corporation in most cases. The corporation makes it’s money from franchising. Your local Mickey D’s is a small business.
“If anything, the decline in union power is partially responsible for our poor economic health.”
That is utter nonsense! Please provide what you think is the correlation? Unions do nothing to create the wealth. Unions stupidly demanded more than businesses could afford to pay. That sent jobs to Mexico and overseas and to automation. School drop out rates are higher and education standards are lower. More people are in prison. More kids are born to single mothers. ALL of that contributes more to the condition of the middle class than the fall of union participation. Unions have created cities that are in debt placing tax pressure on the citizens and that hasn’t helped either. Stupid green regulation is sucking up a lot of money that employers could spend on employees. The middle class is being squeezed and diminished all right but not for lack of a higher minimum wage.
“You actually just said that minimum wage workers have no personal money on the line!”
They don’t! Not in the business. It’s easy to talk about supporting higher wages when you don’t have to come up with the money. Try making payroll and paying the taxes week after week for awhile and then tell me the employee has a personal stake.
He has a need. I don’t deny that. I’m trying to show you what will bring more opportunity for these people. You keep trying to kill the golden goose! Not only that you are so unwilling to learn, so dam* possitive that you have all the answers. Well Chris you are not in school anymore. this is real life and the lessons are much harder. Will you bother to learn or are you bound and determined to make sure there is less opportunity for everybody…just to be right? (Pride is an evil master)
“Radical, ridiculous, and stupid.”
Only because you don’t see the value of the job or the value an individual brings to employment. You have a herd mentality, Chris. You value the herd like a good little progressive. No wonder you have no idea how wealth is created…you have no imagination. Your creative powers have been pressed into a box. Wake up!
“Min. wage workers are more educated and more skilled today than any time in the past. IT HASN’T HELPED. Their wages have actually gone down. You have never once addressed this fact.”
I would be repeating myself and as we see you are incapable of learning. Minimum wage jobs are not for skilled or educated workers. they have always been entry level positions. The educated and well trained are TAKING JOBS AWAY FROM MINIMUM WAGE WORKERS!
If you want better jobs for the educated and trained you had better figure out what makes the economy THRIVE! (Hint: It isn’t more government regulation and it isn’t more expensive government programs and bureaucracy and it isn’t raising taxes OR minimum wage…those things shrink employment opportunity)
“After regular living expenses for the average minimum wage worker, there’s nothing left to save.”
Bulls&*#! American’s are so used to handouts that they’ve become undisciplined! Poor folk have gotten ahead by saving for generations! The WWII generation did it en masse! they lived through the depression by putting pennies in a Masson jar. Cambodians and Vietnamese people have come here with nothing and managed to save their way to better circumstances. Poor people buy things they don’t need not realizing they are consuming the means to a better future…they smoke and drink and buy cocoa puffs and ding dongs instead of rice. I’m talking about attitude. It makes all the difference.
“You are literally arguing that Americans today should not have the same structural advantages you did. That is monstrous.”
No Chris. I am arguing that things are as different today for the small business owner (they provide minimum wage work…not corporations) as they are for the worker. It’s a lot harder to make a profit and stay in business today. Raising the minimum wage will only put more downward pressure on those businesses. The monster is the person(s) who so poorly educated you and who would keep you uneducated in order to retain political advantage. You are a slave to the progressive mindset…you don’t have a prayer of understanding or experiencing freedom and the American dream.
“The “game” has changed since your day, Tina. It is now rigged against workers in a way that it wasn’t when you were starting out.”
If it is it is the party you favor that has rigged it. THINK!
“this generation’s min. wage workers are *harder working* than yours”
More productive isn’t harder working. You are more productive because you have computers and automation that we didn’t have.
In terms of attitude you are way behind the curve and if you continue to refuse to learn you will not have the means to care for yourselves within another generation or so.
“…that’s what’s called a “win-win” scenario. Wages need to increase pretty much across the board to keep up with historical levels.”
You’re really enamored with this historical level stuff. Tell me Chris what other historical factors do you suppose might figure in that the creators of this talking point have failed to tell you? How about the cost of government? How about the cost of doing business? Both of these are eating up revenue that could be used to pay employees…but you prefer to follow the sirens song of the progressive thinker. You prefer to be a part of the herd instead of believing in yourself and the power of any individual to better his own circumstances. Sad that we have come to this. Our nation was built by men and women of stronger constitutions!
“Except that I pointed out in my comment that the most recent and reliable studies show no job loss or business closures as a result of the min. wage.:
The two words that should make you suspicious are “reliable studies”. Any study that must claim itself reliable probably isn’t. What progressive study group produced this study? And what is the purpose?
Simple logic. My gross revenue is what it is. My expenses are what they are. I need X percentage of profit over expenses to stay in business. Minimum wage increases lower that percentage. What can I do? Raise prices. Put less meat and cheese in the hamburger. Fire an employee. Feed my own family less. Continue as usual and eventually close my doors cause I’m in the hole.
Please note that none of these choices are about expanding so I can hire more people. None of them is about improving my bottom line so I can afford to pay a few good employees more.
“merely asserting something that you want to believe does not make something true.”
Are you listening to yourself? You should be! You want it to be true that a higher minimum wage would help people. You refuse to consider that you are wrong even when people with experience in the real world tell you how and why this could hurt more than help. You refuse because you’ve decided business owners are just uncaring monsters not fellow humans that struggle too and have cost considerations you can’t imagine and have never experienced.
“You need to actually show some valid evidence to back up your assertion that raising the minimum wage would hurt workers and the economy.”
Suggested reading:
There are better anti-poverty tools than the minimum wage – AEI
Why raising the minimum wage kills jobs – Forbes
And for the person of advanced abilities:
Demand pull and cost push inflation – Freeeconhelp.com which concludes:
“Toby LITERALLY argued that white people should be afraid of and stay away from black people.”
In a discussion about black on white murder and crime. I don’t think that would be considered racist by anyone who lives outside the university programmed PC box. Self preservation is a tool. Black folks also practice it…especially in Chicago!
“Your party intentionally drove away blacks from the party for decades as a political strategy, because they did not want the Republican party associated with black people. That is simply a fact.”
That is progressive spin and you are simply gullable if you choose to buy into it.
“You have two options: acknowledge the problem and attempt to deal with it, or your party will die ”
You are, if nothing else, completely full of yourself. You fit right in with the other narcissists in your party.
Tina, you are in good company with your attempts to inform and educate those who were taught an altered version of our history.
5 Mainstream Media Takedowns & Takeaways
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/09/76564-5-big-takeaways-top-democrat-takedowns-mainstream-media/
NEW YORK (AP) — McDonald’s more than tripled the pay packages last year for its new CEO Don Thompson and the man he replaced, Jim Skinner.
The wages vs profits of McDonalds seem to oppose this post. Sorry but Obama care is not in affect yet. The 3 things in law now are pre-existing, till 26 yrs on parents, 1 other.
America we need to turn off the media and talk about facts. A northern cal town hall.
I believe after the deregualted market crash I heard people tell the unemployed to get a job at McDonalds so many did! Now they are to be hated?
Why do people think others have to do as they do? Living wages?
How does everybody feel about subsidizing walmart workers with foodstamps and healthcare while the walmart children who inherited their wealth that is as muck as 30% of American wealth
Tina: “The two words that should make you suspicious are “reliable studies”. Any study that must claim itself reliable probably isn’t.”
*headdesk*
You don’t know anything about how academic studies work, at all.
Establishing reliability of data is CRUCIAL in crafting a study. Most well-done studies will explain their methodology early on, and if the findings contradict earlier studies, the researchers will explain why they think their methodology is more reliable than the methodology used by previous studies. That’s basic stuff that every college freshman needs to know.
You don’t know this, because you don’t read studies, you read dishonest editorials that grossly misrepresent studies to further a political agenda. Then when it’s pointed out to you that you haven’t actually cited a study, but rather cited an article that has basically been called a pack of lies by the authors of said study, you refuse to admit any error.
You also don’t understand how to tell reliable methodology from unreliable methodology, even when the difference is a very simple one, and even when its been explained to you multiple times.
And you seem to believe that a “study” about one privately funded liberal arts college is somehow evidence that “U.S. universities & colleges” are “unworthy of support.”
I’m not judging you because you don’t know how studies work. Most Americans don’t. That’s distressing. But it doesn’t make you stupid, it makes you common.
What makes you uncommonly stupid is how goddamn proud you are of your own ignorance. You don’t read academic studies? Fine. You don’t have a basic grasp of how they work or what is included in them? OK. But what makes you think you have any qualifications for criticizing an academic study given these deficits in your knowledge? What makes you think you can substantially argue with someone who actually does know something about this topic? What makes you think that it’s OK for you to make ridiculous proclamations like “Any study that must claim itself reliable probably isn’t,” when you have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not that statement is true?
That comment perfectly represents the toxic combination of arrogance and ignorance that has come to characterize the modern right. It’s not that you don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s that you don’t think you should even have to. It’s that you’re offended by the notion that you should try. It’s that you don’t feel the least bit embarrassed when you say something stupid about a subject you know nothing about. It’s that you think your baseless assertions and articles of faith should be given equal or greater weight than actual fact-based evidence.
Your anti-intellectualism has gotten to the point where you think it’s elitist when people ask you to do some basic research or fact-checking before you make absurd claims that have no relationship to reality. As you read this, you are already crafting a response in which you will call me a “bully” or a “tyrant” trying to “silence your first amendment rights” by pointing out the objective fact that you have no clue what the hell you’re talking about, and you should probably find out before saying ridiculously false things about a subject which you have no experience with.
So please, do us both a favor: before you say another stupid thing about academic studies, learn a little bit about them. That is not an unreasonable demand. That is literally the least you can do.
“What progressive study group produced this study?”
I said there were multiple studies, I’ve linked to them multiple times, and you only automatically assume that they were made by a “progressive study group” because you don’t want to believe the conclusions. That is the only way you know how to evaluate studies. You judge studies as reliable if they conform to your preconceived biases, and you judge them as unreliable if they are contrary to those biases. And you do this without even reading them.
If you actually had an interest in the evidence regarding minimum wage and the unemployment rate, and were not solely interested in “What can I post to make the president look bad today?” you would already know what studies I’m referring to. I’ll let you Google them yourself; you could use a little time outside the right-wing information bubble.
Chris: “*headdesk*”
Incapable of appreciating a sarcastic comment, are we, Chris?
We were discussing minimum wage. You toss in the words “reliable study” as if those words means you carry the absolute truth and I had better appreciate the superiority of your opinion because of it.
“…you read dishonest editorials that grossly misrepresent studies to further a political agenda.”
Let’s pretend that everything you write constitutes original thought and every one of your sources is neutral and without political bias. Come on Chris…get real.
“And you seem to believe that a “study” about one privately funded liberal arts college is somehow evidence that “U.S. universities & colleges” are “unworthy of support.”
You keep talking about what I believe as if you knew me. You don’t.
How about you show me examples of how open an politically unbiased colleges and universities are today. I know our readers would appreciate it.
I can think of one…Hillsdale College.
I have posted a number of examples that demonstrate the political bias, the propaganda, and the intolerance of opposing positions and thought that exists on college campuses today. This was just another example. Some of us do believe that a number of them are unworthy of support and should be roundly criticized! I don’t mind that you disagree.
“But it doesn’t make you stupid, it makes you common.”
Wow, Chris how elitist of you!
Let me see…you are the kid with the college degree in English Literature that can’t find a job other than at WalMart, largely because of the policies of the party you support, and the studies you defend and you claimm with a straight face that you’re not “judging me” even as you call me common?
Okay. Whatever rings that little elitist bell.
“That comment perfectly represents the toxic combination of arrogance and ignorance that has come to characterize the modern right.”
Have you paid close attention to anything written or said by the left over the last fifty to seventy years?
“We have to pass it so we can see what’s in it away from the fog of the controversy” is a fairly arrogant and ignorant thing to say by a woman who “passed it” using bribes and coercion behind closed doors and without a single Republican participant!
The Presidents “red line” comments come to mind also…but, according to him, he didn’t say that. He didn’t stand there like an arrogant, ignorant jerk and pretend to be a tough guy instead of being a leader and then later when he was trapped by his words say, “My credibility is not on the line, the international community’s credibility is on the line. America and Congress’s credibility is on the line.”
The right has been patiently repeating our opinions about economics and world affairs to the jibes and sneers of the left for decades. Don’t preach to me about arrogance or ignorance! We are currently living through the hell and the proof of the lie of progressive policy and opinion and it is miserable!
And even though you are college educated, and therefore not common, you refuse to even consider that someone less educated but with years of business experience might know something you don’t.
Now THAT is ignorant!
As far as minimum wage goes Chris there are academic studies that show the exact opposite of what you claim. Academics do that…they study and they debate. Do any of them have real world experience to back up their theories and opinions? Usually, no, they do not! Most have spent their lives in classrooms, libraries, museums, and, over the crazy lazy summer months, French restaurants…eating and drinking wine and theorizing with other academics.
“If you actually had an interest in the evidence regarding minimum wage and the unemployment rate, and were not solely interested in “What can I post to make the president look bad today?”
The President is already doing a bang up job of looking bad all by himself. Talking about what goes on in politics is what we do.
Also, as I pointed out before, you were here at Post Scripts during the Bush presidency and I don’t recall you holding back criticisms of him…I do recall you taking every possible opportunity to hammer him into the ground. So please spare me the image of Chris as open minded and unbiased.
As for information bubbles Chris I have read the articles that you have taken your talking points from on many occasions…you can knock off the pretense there too.
The problem you have Chris is that everything we warned would happen if Obama was elected, if Obamacare was passed, if draconian taxes and regulation were imposed has happened. You are sitting in the pile of dung your party created and you are desperate for anything to make it not true.
My kids and grandkids are being hurt…severly hurt! Of course I care about more than making the president look bad.
Tina: “Incapable of appreciating a sarcastic comment, are we, Chris?”
You don’t actually expect me to buy that, do you?
You didn’t know that claiming reliability is something that studies are SUPPOSED to do. Just admit it.
“We were discussing minimum wage. You toss in the words “reliable study” as if those words means you carry the absolute truth and I had better appreciate the superiority of your opinion because of it.”
NO. I don’t expect you to take my word for it when I tell you a study is reliable. The rational thing to do for a curious individual would be to actually look at the studies, compare their methodologies, and figure out for yourself which is reliable. That’s what I’ve done. But you have neither the ability nor the desire to do that, so you just decide to believe whichever study confirms your preconceived beliefs. That’s much easier, and it doesn’t require you to think.
“Let’s pretend that everything you write constitutes original thought and every one of your sources is neutral and without political bias. Come on Chris…get real.”
Total non-sequiter. The issue is not neutrality or political bias. The issue is that the editorial you linked FLAT-OUT LIED about the study it was citing. And it lied in a very obvious way. It said that the study showed there was no scientific consensus that man-made global warming exists, when the study in question only studied engineers in Alberta, and the majority actually DID believe that man-made global warming exists! When I asked you to address this error, you explicitly refused. You never accept responsibility for the inaccuracies you post here. You always attempt to distract, even though you know that doesn’t work on me. It’s dishonest and embarrassing.
“You keep talking about what I believe as if you knew me. You don’t.”
My God, I’m talking about your own words that you wrote on this site. What is wrong with you?
“How about you show me examples of how open an politically unbiased colleges and universities are today.”
No. When you use a bullshit argument to prove a point, the responsibility does not fall on me to disprove that point. ESPECIALLY when you refuse to admit that your original argument was bullshit.
You always do this. You always get the specifics wrong and then act as if that doesn’t matter because you were only using them to prove a larger point. Then you ask that I provide evidence for the counter-position when you still have not provided any valid evidence for your own. It’s ridiculous.
“I can think of one…Hillsdale College.”
…Wait…Your example of a ” politically unbiased college”…is a college that has been described by a “citadel of conservativism” by the National Review?
You don’t know what “unbiased” means, and you are genuinely stupid.
“Wow, Chris how elitist of you!”
Thank you for proving my point.
“Let me see…you are the kid with the college degree in English Literature that can’t find a job other than at WalMart,”
Stay classy, Tina.
Chris: “You didn’t know that claiming reliability is something that studies are SUPPOSED to do. Just admit it.”
But that is not what I did. I was referring to you who wrote: “Except that I pointed out in my comment that the most recent and reliable studies…”
As far as I was concerned it was you claiming the study, which you did not quote and which I can find no reference to other than a graph, was reliable.
“The issue is that the editorial you linked FLAT-OUT LIED about the study it was citing.”
Aha! I have finally caught up with your endless distraction about studies.
The IBD article does not “flat out lie”. The IBD article is from an investors publication. Investors who are familiar with the industry understand the 70% covers both the cost of food and employee costs which include taxes and benefits if any.
I corrected that error in understanding almost immediately.
“The rational thing to do for a curious individual would be to actually look at the studies, compare their methodologies, and figure out for yourself which is reliable.”
There is nothing to look at in your comments but a link to a graph. What the hell are you talking about?
“My God, I’m talking about your own words that you wrote on this site. What is wrong with you?”
Right back atcha smarta**.
You will note that you have absolutely nothing to say about the reasons I have given you for not raising the minimum wage. You refuse to engage in a discussion about what that would do to the businesses that hire people at minimum wage. You refuse to consider that raising business costs will cause the loss of jobs and yet we have seen businesses cut workers to part time or let workers go because of the increases in cost created b Obamacare.
“Wait…Your example of a ” politically unbiased college”…is a college that has been described by a “citadel of conservativism” by the National Review?
Yes Chris. They still teach at that college. That’s what makes it “conservative”.
You have spent a lot of time trying to prove nothing Chris and managed to avoid the salient point of the article. That makes you less than classy by a long shot. Snob might fit and its a real shame because when you first started posting here you were bright, open and engaging. Now you are just a tool with a *&#% attitude who is great at avoiding real discussion of the subject at hand.
Raising the minimum wage would help those few workers who manage to hold on to their jobs but it would lead to losses of jobs and hours for many more because of the greater expense in wages and taxes to the employers whose bottom lines are already thin. The following articles show how adding to employer costs leads to loss of jobs, hours and benefits:
LA Times
FOX News:
Atlanta Business Chronicle:
A discussion about raising minimum wage is a discussion about raising the cost of doing business. There is no way to have an intelligent discussion about minimum wage increases without discussing the impact to those who actually pay the wage. Many of those on the left are picketing small franchise stores while pretending that corporate profits are part of the equation. this is the lie that the picketers don’t understand and, of course, are not told. They are kept in the dark, fed BS, and remain good little tools of the Marxist control freak that pose as defenders and champions of the poor. Well the evidence is in…they have been in charge of our economy for the past five years and the poor and low wage workers are suffering dramatically!
This is the real problem for you Chris and it is exactly what is making you so nasty, contentious, and mean spirited.
Tina: “But that is not what I did. I was referring to you who wrote: “Except that I pointed out in my comment that the most recent and reliable studies…”
As far as I was concerned it was you claiming the study, which you did not quote and which I can find no reference to other than a graph, was reliable.”
That is not what you said.
You said:
“The two words that should make you suspicious are “reliable studies”. Any study that must claim itself reliable probably isn’t.”
Now you are saying you were referring to me “claiming the study…was reliable,” even though you clearly wrote that a study that claimed *itself* to be reliable must be unreliable. A statement which, as I’ve pointed out, shows unabashed ignorance
So either you’re dishonestly attempting to pretend you made an entirely different argument than the incredibly stupid one you actually made, or you simply can’t remember your own train of thought, and are too lazy to scroll up and look at the actual words you wrote just a few comments back.
There is little point in arguing with someone who constantly behaves this way.
“The IBD article does not “flat out lie”.”
I wasn’t talking about any IBD article. I was talking about the PJ Media article that lied about the results of a study on opinions regarding global warming. I made that very clear in my last comment, and explained once again exactly how the article misrepresented the findings of the study. So how you could read that and think I was referring to an IBD article about fast food industry costs is a mystery to me.
Is it too much to ask you to keep up with the basics of this conversation?
“I corrected that error in understanding almost immediately.”
You never corrected your error regarding the PJ Media article that misrepresented the global warming study. When I asked you to do so, you flatly refused, would not even acknowledge the article you linked to in your blog post, and instead began link-dumping several other articles that you expected me to read and respond to, even though the first article you linked to was proven to be completely deceptive. That was totally unreasonable.
“There is nothing to look at in your comments but a link to a graph. What the hell are you talking about?”
Again, I made this clear: I’ve linked to the studies I’m referring to before. Here, for instance:
http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2013/02/19/obama-mistake-9-minimum-wage/
Instead of looking those studies over and offering any critique of their methodology, you dismissed them out of hand and refused to even read them. This was your first response:
“Chris’s economists argue that “recent research” or the latest research, finds, blah blah, blah. Obviously they have chosen to set aside the “decades of economic research” that is available in order to make their dubious case.”
What good would it do to link to the studies again? You’re not interested in examining the information. You can’t even remember that I’ve already given this information to you!
“You will note that you have absolutely nothing to say about the reasons I have given you for not raising the minimum wage. You refuse to engage in a discussion about what that would do to the businesses that hire people at minimum wage.”
False, I’ve gone over all that with you before. Your selective memory is not my problem.
“You refuse to consider that raising business costs will cause the loss of jobs”
Please stop saying “refuse to consider” when what has actually happened is that I’ve considered that point of view and then rejected it due to lack of evidence or contradictory evidence.
“and yet we have seen businesses cut workers to part time or let workers go because of the increases in cost created b Obamacare.”
Actually, we haven’t seen that, and even economists who predicted we would are now admitting they were wrong:
“The gains are beginning to shift the terms of the debate over the health care law. Under the law, businesses with 50-plus full-time-equivalent workers must offer insurance to people working 30 hours a week beginning in 2015. That mandate, originally slated for 2014, has not deterred hiring as feared, some economists now say.
As more data come in, the law’s impact can’t be seen in hiring statistics, says Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics.
“I was expecting to see it. I was looking for it, and it’s not there,” says Zandi, whose firm manages ADP’s surveys of overall private-sector job creation. If the Affordable Care Act “were causing a drop, you would see meaningful slowing.”
New research from Moody’s and other economists also challenges the idea that small employers are hiring only part-time workers to avoid falling under the health care law’s mandate to insure full-time workers.
It’s true that about 77% of jobs added nationwide in 2013 are part time. But this year’s new jobs are concentrated in industries such as restaurants and hospitality that use as much as twice as many part-timers as other companies, Moody’s economist Marisa DiNatale found in a July paper. Most industries are actually using fewer part-timers than last year, DiNatale said.
Likewise, FT Advisors chief economist Brian Wesbury says this year’s gains in part-time hiring offset a late-2012 drop in part-time jobs when full-time employment was surging. For the last 12 months, 75% of new jobs are full time, according to the Labor Department.”
Good news for the country. Bad news for conservatives.
“Yes Chris. They still teach at that college. That’s what makes it “conservative”.”
….what?
So is it conservative or is it unbiased? It can’t be both. You…you do know that, right?
Forgot the link: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/08/20/small-business-hiring/2662407/
Chris: “Now you are saying you were referring to me “claiming the study…was reliable,” even though you clearly wrote that a study that claimed *itself* to be reliable must be unreliable.”
It is still you, however, that assumes it is reliable simply because it’s claim is “recent” and “reliable”. I don’t give a damn about the work involved in doing a study. As we have seen countless times (see glo-warmer ice predictions in my latest post), studies often prove to be utterly false. The reason is that the people doing the study wanted to come to a particular conclusion so they begin with the conclusion and then go find the statistics to “prove” they are right.
The thing you were avoiding in our exchange was the other factors that should be considered when contemplating raising the minimum wage and the other factors that contribute to higher costs today for the employer than were there in the sixties. You and your study seem to be assuming that business expenses remained static. The point seems to be that the only reason wages haven’t kept up with inflation is because those franchise owners are greedy and selfish and don’t care about people and that is an absurd conclusion.
I am guilty of one thing…allowing myself to be sucked in to a totally irrational and distracting argument.
“Is it too much to ask you to keep up with the basics of this conversation?”
Yes it is Chris. You are not interested in discussing points pertaining to the post. You are interested in side issues. You are interested in misdirection and avoidance. You will not comment on the fact that raising the minimum wage will raise expenses for employers because you cannot prove it wrong. It is pure unadulterated fact. So you pick some stupid study that insists jobs aren’t lost when expenses for employers go up (min wage is raised) and claim it is “recent and reliable” as if that meant anything.
I live in the real world Chris. I can’t eat studies nor can I pay rent with them. A lot of the tax I pay go to the bloated salaries and benefits enjoyed by people that make those studies…I’d rather keep the cash and grow my business. I’m already struggling so I can’t absorb another expense imposed on my business…in fact I might have to do without one of my most reliable part timers if the min wage is raised again. But you don’t give a damn about the loss of jobs for my employee or the pressure on me and every other small business owners who make payroll.
You seem to care most about trying to make me look like a fool.
I have foolishly aided you in this by skimming your relentless comments thereby missing some of the irrelevant, distracting content…my bad.
“Instead of looking those studies over and offering any critique of their methodology, you dismissed them out of hand and refused to even read them.”
The truth is I dismissed YOU out of hand for the reasons above…once again my bad. You seem to be under the impression that I am obligated to read things you post in depth…as if you were giving me an assignment. Sorry Chris I haven’t signed up for your class and I have better things to do with my time. I already indulge your flights into unrelated and distracting forays way too much.
Excuses for this economy and the leftists that create studies just so you will have talking points are not reassuring to those of us who do make payroll week after week, Chris. I hope you can learn to live on the hot air in studies. I assure you it will not not translate to dollars in the pockets of very many people.
Sadly you will not admit to the causes of the biggest unnecessary tragedy of our time…the extremely high unemployment numbers for the most vulnerable among us and the unprecedented numbers that now live in poverty. Obama’s non-recovery recovery is entirely responsible…Obama’s fundamental transformation of America is entirely responsible….Obama’s transfer of wealth policies are entirely responsible. Left wing solutions, like raising the minimum wage, are entirely responsible.
Tina: “It is still you, however, that assumes it is reliable simply because it’s claim is “recent” and “reliable”.”
No. First of all, you say “it” when we are talking about multiple studies. Second of all, I do not “assume” those studies are reliable. I have examined their methodologies and compared them to the methodologies of previous studies, and logically concluded that the recent studies are more reliable.
You haven’t done anything like that; that would require you to actually read and understand the studies under discussion.
It is you who is assuming. You decided the studies I referred to couldn’t be accurate the moment you heard the conclusions. They didn’t agree with your preconceived beliefs and that was all you needed to know.
“I don’t give a damn about the work involved in doing a study.”
And yet you continue to cite studies that agree with your point of view. Usually these studies come from conservative think tanks. (I guess you think those are “unbiased” in the same way you think Hillsdale College is “unbiased,” because you lack basic middle school vocabulary skills.) You also cite articles that misrepresent studies and lie about their conclusions.
It is extraordinarily disingenuous of you to say “Studies are meaningless” when it suits you, but then be all “Look at this awesome Heritage Foundation study proving Reagan was right/global warming is a hoax/evolution is a myth!” the moment you find one that you think supports your point.
“As we have seen countless times (see glo-warmer ice predictions in my latest post), studies often prove to be utterly false.”
The article you just cited is from a UK tabloid and was written by a notorious liar who has been accused by multiple scientists, including the UK Met Office, of misrepresenting their work. The evidence used by skeptics like David Rose to disprove the consensus view is usually false in and of itself. If you had a shred of genuine intellectual curiosity you would try to get your information from more credible scientists. I understand that is a difficult task for you since there are virtually no credible scientists who believe man-made global warming is not a problem, but that’s tough. There is NO scientific controversy regarding man-made global warming, there is only a political controversy.
“The reason is that the people doing the study wanted to come to a particular conclusion so they begin with the conclusion and then go find the statistics to “prove” they are right.”
And the authors of the studies you cite never do that, right? Even though they’re almost always funded by expressly partisan think tanks?
“You and your study seem to be assuming that business expenses remained static.”
How could you possibly know that when you haven’t read or done any research on the studies under discussion?
This just proves my point: you really think you’re entitled to make sweeping proclamations about things you know nothing about. You think your baseless assertions that you make up in your head have equal merit to actual fact-based evidence and research.
You are wrong.
“The point seems to be that the only reason wages haven’t kept up with inflation is because those franchise owners are greedy and selfish and don’t care about people and that is an absurd conclusion.”
That is not the conclusion of any of the studies I have cited, which you would know if you read any of them.
“You are not interested in discussing points pertaining to the post. You are interested in side issues.”
Ridiculous. The topic of this post was possible impacts of the minimum wage. I have attempted to use evidence and research to discuss this issue with you.
But evidence and research are just “side issues” to you. Your point is to further an emotional political narrative. Anything that gets in the way of that is immediately dismissed by you.
“You will not comment on the fact that raising the minimum wage will raise expenses for employers because you cannot prove it wrong.”
Except I have commented on this before, and some of the studies I have cited take this into account. It is predicted that business costs would only rise slightly to accommodate a minimum wage increase, and the increases in demand would more than make up for this.
You may disagree with that, but please stop telling me I’ve “ignored” issues that I’ve specifically addressed. That is a waste of both our time.
“You seem to care most about trying to make me look like a fool.”
Well, stop making it so damn easy. When you say things like “Any study claiming to be reliable probably isn’t” or “Hillsdale College is unbiased,” you are making yourself look like a fool. I don’t know why you do this. It is not hard to use Google to find out that the things you’re saying are factually untrue.
“You seem to be under the impression that I am obligated to read things you post in depth…as if you were giving me an assignment.”
No. You are not obligated to read everything I post in depth. You are obligated to not accuse me of ignoring things I have repeatedly addressed.
Chris: “I have examined their methodologies and compared them to the methodologies of previous studies, and logically concluded that the recent studies are more reliable.”
Good for you. Now you can be right and I can get on with life as it actually happens in the real world.
It would be much simpler Chris if you would cite your studies and give your opinion and let others do the same. Argue the points but arguments about which studies are lies and which represent the truth are useless and distracting.
Hillsdale College is a conservative college. What that means to me is that they actually teach in the manner that most institutions of higher learning once did in America. It does not mean they are Republican or even political.
American colleges have changed over the past fifty years to become radical, left-leaning, indoctrination centers. Of course not every class and not every instructor fits into the progressive/liberal mold but many do so that generally speaking the education students receive is biased to the left and often almost entirely useless.
That is my opinion based on observation and reports from instructors that have noticed the shift.
You have done everything in your power to discount the real life experience that small business owners will have. I don’t know what is to be gained by this except a few dollars in your pocket if you win and that will do you very little good in an economy that will soon experience even worse inflation and that will produce fewer jobs. Your arguments are little comfort to people who actually have to live with the results of policies that are made by inexperienced people who think they know everything or who can spend time studying and consuming wealth while others actually produce it.
It isn’t that studies aren’t useful. It is that they do not represent life as it happens and they do not represent the whole truth. Making policy based on a study could and often does end in disaster as the things that lead to unintended consequences have not been considered.
I am really amazed that you can continue to maintain such a sharp caustic edge in the face of very high unemployment and poverty after five years of left policy. You say you care about poor people and you can see that they have been hurt badly by the policies of this administration. Instead of being curious about what might work better, or about what might work better for all poor people, you spend time defending what has clearly failed.
We disagree completely. Isn’t that the bottom line?
Before leaving you I will take another last stab. You wrote:
Imagine you are the owner of a small business. Your costs have increased over the past five to seven years. Shipping cost are up because of the higher cost of energy…it also costs more to heat and cool the place. The new healthcare law is threatening to undermine the insurance plan that you have generously provided your employees…estimates are not helpful because they range from 50% up to 300% higher. Cash flow has been tough. You have to buy parts months before you will ship and be paid for the products you produce and now your customers, some of them hurting as much as you are, aren’t paying within thirty days. They are in fact late by 60, 120, or more days. Taxes and regulations change constantly mean the CPA has more work to do to file your taxes and help you maintain compliance…more expense. Every now and then a payday rolls around and your bank account doesn’t quite cover it…you dip into savings and skip paying yourself.
This is indicative of the real life experience, day by day, that employers go through in a bad economy. Do you think that a study that says, “It is predicted that business costs would only rise slightly to accommodate a minimum wage increase” will matter much to you? Do you think you would hear that and heave a sigh of relief and be inspired to take the chance to hire someone? Or, do you think it would be just another hit to an already difficult circumstance and move you closer to trying to get along without the last person you hired? Which decision would make it easier for you to sleep once again at night?
Do you have any idea, at all, how insane and insensitive your argument is to people who actually have to generate the money to be able to pay their employees in the first place?
Do you have any idea what its like to have to tell an employee you can’t keep them on anymore?
I am not the ignorant monster you attempt to make me Chris. I do not put forth arguments or ideas for the fun of it like some young student in a cafeteria debate with friends. I have responsibilities to meet. I see others in the same situation who are also struggling. There is nothing we want more than to offer people jobs, give them some good work experience and watch them go on to better jobs at higher pay. There is nothing I want more than to see all Americans working and experiencing the satisfaction of earning a decent living and realizing their dreams. I have experienced economic success and economic malaise and I prefer success…an expanding economy and lots a good jobs to choose from for anyone who wants to work. It isn’t just politics…as I have pointed out Kennedy and Clinton created vibrancy in the economy using the policies I defend.
That is all I have to say on the subject.
Tina, at dinner last night with friends who own a small business he said he wasn’t going to be able to give any pay raises to his employees for at least the next five years to cover the increased cost to their health care. He told his employees to consider their health care coverage the pay raises they would have received.
He’s hoping the projected increased cost of doing business and with higher interest rates coming he won’t have to lay off any employees.
I’m so glad I’m no longer a business owner. My heart goes out to you and all of the others who will be dealing with the “perfect storm” getting ready to hit because of the community organizers that have been in charge for the past five years.
Hopefully, our next leader will come from the business world with leadership skills and with military service credits.