Glorious People's Republic of Seattle Declared

[GoodGame]

I pity the people who whine that they worked hard to get to their $15/hr wage and now the "worthless" are just as valuable as them. It is people like you who caused a "surprising" change like this to be even necessary. Get off your high horse and take a look at the bigger picture. It was bad that you had to work so hard to have a somewhat livable wage, not great. Promoting the viewpoint that others should have to experience the same misery and challenges as you did simply because you experienced them before they did seems... a little narrow-minded and perhaps a bit sadistic.

Hmmmmmm If those people worked their butt off to get good grades in school to bachelor's degrees and beyond, I feel sorry for them, actually. They aren't to blame for wage disparity, especially as $15 / hr for educated workers is actually quite mediocre.

Why target that wage bracket? Why not target wages at $100,000+?


I agree with the principle that mandating a large jump in wages will risk job creation, because of the implied capital costs, but it all depends on whether or the not the public school systems prepare them for entry level $15/hour jobs.

 

[El_Machinae]

Why target that wage bracket? Why not target wages at $100,000+?

That would be better.
What we have to remember is that this is a pretty rough system for improving people's lots. It's effectively a regressive tax on business. Now, a regressive tax can go a long way for generating growth, but they're certainly not ideal. Under any analysis, a progressive tax is better*. A major issue is taxation power. Seattle might be able to impose a minimum wage law in a way that it would never be able to tax.

*Zero taxes are fine as long as two conditions are met: no negative externalities and if the business gets no special privileges from being registered.

 

[ParkCungHee]

That's a pretty bad way to look at it.
As I mentioned in my last post, even if 100% of the national wealth went into wages, which is of course impossible, a 30 dollars per hour minimum wage still looks unfeasible.

Well, then you're bad at basic arithmetic.

So I took the much simpler route of showing that there isn't enough wealth in the country to pay that minimum wage, an assertion for which I do have data.

Unfortunately, you were off by several orders of magnitude.

If you're not happy with it, you can take the calculations I did using the total national wealth of the USA. I don't think you can object to any of that.

I'm not objecting, I'm just following through on your calculations, and pointing out, given your own assumptions, aside from the implicit acknowledgement that any sort of income inequality represent actual, outright theft, Americans can very easily support a minimum wage of well over $30 dollars an hour, if you run the numbers. If you dispute otherwise, you don't even have abstract mathematics on your side, and you are in the position of arguing that math is wrong.

You can have your math, or you can have your claim that America can't support a $30 dollar an hour minimum wage. You can't have both.

 

[Crezth]

I wasn't attempting to make any proper economic analysis of what would happen, because I don't have nearly enough data nor expertise to make any precise assessment.

As his finger hovered over the mouse button, cursor poised on "Submit Reply," for a split-second luiz stopped to contemplate the value his post was adding to the conversation. "Do I really know what I'm talking about?" he asked himself with a pang. He began to wonder whether it was really worth it to post about something he didn't have an educated opinion on. For an instant, his hand relaxed. In another instant, down went the finger, *click* went the mouse, and he sat back in his chair with a self-satisfied grin.

He had won the war with himself. He had made a post on the internet, and, well, that was it, really.

 

[Tarquelne]

He had won the war with himself. He had made a post on the internet, and, well, that was it, really.

I don't like your attitude.

You seem to be implying there should be some direct relationship between the strength of your claims, or the length at which you address a subject, and your actual knowledge of the subject.

First, that's completely contrary to our current political system. And, really, system of governance.
Second, it places truth above free speech.
Third, if taken to heart, it would pretty much rip the heart from the contemporary journalism.

Unless you're some sort of crypto-Trotskyian Luddite, I think you should seriously rethink your position, mister.

 

[Traitorfish]

First, that's completely contrary to our current political system. And, really, system of governance.
Second, it places truth above free speech.
Third, if taken to heart, it would pretty much rip the heart from the contemporary journalism.

See, these all sound like perfectly reasonable ambitions to me, so I'm not sure if you're being ironic or what.

 

[Tarquelne]

See, these all sound like perfectly reasonable ambitions to me

You're a crypto-Trotskian Luddite. Everybody knows that.

 

[Traitorfish]

Damn, got me there.

 

[Crezth]

Unless you're some sort of crypto-Trotskyian Luddite, I think you should seriously rethink your position, mister.

Boy, you just can't make fun of uninformed posts anymore without being called a crypto-Trotskyian Luddite.