There's been practically no inflation. The payouts will be changed very little.
San Francisco Becomes First US City With $10 Minimum Wage
- Thread starter Hantlers
- Start date
There's been practically no inflation. The payouts will be changed very little.
I didn't say I was "all about" entrepreneurial ventures. I said "I believe in the power of business creativity, entreprenuership, and capitalistic motives". They are powerful forces, and respond well to changing conditions. They don't need to be babied.
I don't recall saying that I was quoting you. I am characterizing your reaction. If you believe that business can easily accomodate minor changes, why has yourreaction to this change taken on the shape it has?
Minimum wage laws do not seem to have halted innovation in this country.
In some cases, yes. So there.
You would be Thrilled to know he's still hanging around...
https://www.slcap.org/phppages/foodstampcalc.php
Kind of veering off topic, but I was curious what results people get here...
At the risk of confusing you further, I'll attempt to respond.
Business owners aren't machines. Sometimes they're human. It is possible that they aren't solely concerned with greed and profits. Not all business is heartless. When faced with having to pay employees more, sometimes (see Trout's response) they just will. However, sometimes their margin is thin enough that they have to make adjustments.
Forcing the owner to pay more to the 4 decreases the likelihood that he'll be willing to hire #5.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Where is your evidence that the pace of innovation is exactly the same with the laws as it might have been without them? Can you show that we are exactly as well off now as we might have been without minimum wage laws?
That is something you cannot really say, on either side of that question. Yes, I agree that businesses adapt and move on. I am in business, after all, and a big part of my job is helping my company adapt to the changing market forces. I was arguing that this change would likely have a larger impact on smaller businesses and thereby affect peoples' lives, particularly in the middle class, primarily as a reaction to whoever started the argument (Thriller? siromar? they bleed together) that all businesses are multi-millionaire driven greed machines. There are all kinds of businesses. Big and small. All will be affected differently by a change like this. And even the little businesses will impact peoples' lives. That was the point.
Your car will still run but you may not be able to drive it anywhere because sand bags are in the way.
Can you provide an example?
Considerably more than I got around here, or in Ohio. Thank you for the correction. I'm truly suprised by the amount.
Last edited:
You haven't confounded me. Your response have pretty much been boilerplate. I'm checking to see if you can justify the connections, because I don't recall seeing such justificaitons before.
I agree business owners are not hearatless, especially not small-business owners (it's much harder to cut one face yo usee daily than 1,000 you never met). Faced wtih a decision between cutting a psition or find a new method to increase efficiency, they will find new ways to improve efficiency. Necessity spurs invention.
I agree.
I agree the larger impact will there, for the better or the worse. I disagree the impact is inevitably, or even largely, worse.
As LogGrad98 pointed out, we don't have data comparing a counter-factual with our current economy. For all we know, minimum-wage laws have a long-term effect similar to removing sandbags.
If I cut my hours in half, and my wife stopped working, we could get this:
Estimated Food Stamp Eligiblity Amount = $ 550
Gross Income = $1917.8
Net Income = $658.24
Excess Shelter Amount = $367
Food Stamp Income = $198
Maximun food stamp amount = $668
Holy crap. Maybe I should start accepting more cash payments...
The numbers seemed really high for me, and it seems odd that it would vary so much from state to state. Wonder if these are accurate or if I'm missing some stipulation.
Anecdotally, I know a family of 5 (3 kids under 10) in my neighborhood that qualifies for $450/month in food stamps (in addition to free breakfast and lunch at the school).
The company I work for doesn't have an extra $665 laying around. No way could we afford a MANDATORY raise of 32 cents per hour. Does that mean my boss sucks or that my company is destined to fail?
I think most people would agree with this statement.
Of course not, and I didn't imply that your boss sucks. My implication, which is likely worthless, was when a company can't afford to drop $665.00 for an employee expense, that probably means that the next time a central piece of equipment needs to be replaced, or something is stolen and a $500.00 deductible has to be paid, or your insurance goes up that your company is probably in deep peepee water, and likely on the way out of business. Is that always the case? Nope. See bullet point 6 above.
That's because I'm so agreeable.
That's just not honest. Why would I get insurance through a dishonest insurance salesman?
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Mind = blown.