So far the data suggest that Fight-For-15 has been a failure in CA and could end up costing 400,000 jobs (rentals, tenants)

[RationalExpectations]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Remember that many unions have a policy of having salaries raised every time the minimum wage goes up. Costing everyone more. That inflates the cost of living in taxes and thew cost of goods and services.

I understand, but that isn't a general increase in the price level. That's an increase in the price of some things.

Originally Posted by expatCA

https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-la...imumwage-rises


The minimum wage is an incredibly inefficient way to help the poor because many of the gains go to households that are not in or even near poverty

Oh I agree. When the minimum wage goes up to $15, for example, it makes someone who earns $18 in the free market look relatively more desirable to employers. Why pay $15 for someone who, absent the minimum wage increase, is only worth, say, $8 when I could pay 20% more ($3 more) and get someone who legitimately is over double more ($8 vs. $18)?

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by RationalExpectations

For example, by the time the BLS puts something new in its CPI basket -- say, a smart cell phone or a WiFi enabled TV set or brushless battery operated power tools, the item has already declined in price down the steep part of the curve & is (relatively) inexpensive.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fed...on-11557688767

Excellent point.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by RationalExpectations

Oh I agree. When the minimum wage goes up to $15, for example, it makes someone who earns $18 in the free market look relatively more desirable to employers. Why pay $15 for someone who, absent the minimum wage increase, is only worth, say, $8 when I could pay 20% more ($3 more) and get someone who legitimately is over double more ($8 vs. $18)?

That's exactly what happens. People who propagate the myth that the minimum wage "creates a wealthier lower class" are fooling themselves.

Employers are market decision makers as well. If they're forced to pay $15 an hour for someone, a wage above the market floor for the position, they will pick candidates higher on the totem pole freezing out the "no experience" types who were just looking for a foot in the door.

A risky choice at $8.50 an hour, but completely off the list at $15. Minimum wage proponents lack understanding of this simple concept.

[Csonka]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

That's exactly what happens. People who propagate the myth that the minimum wage "creates a wealthier lower class" are fooling themselves.

Employers are market decision makers as well. If they're forced to pay $15 an hour for someone, a wage above the market floor for the position, they will pick candidates higher on the totem pole freezing out the "no experience" types who were just looking for a foot in the door.

A risky choice at $8.50 an hour, but completely off the list at $15. Minimum wage proponents lack understanding of this simple concept.

So true

The employer will always take the best available

The trainees or the inexperienced get hosed

But interesting is that family owned businesses are exempt from these rules, which is why I see a lot o the se family owned mom and pops doing okay, dad works the kitchen, mom at the door, kids waiting tables, uncle mopping floors, etc

Seems to be the only model that will survive if not a major business

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Csonka

So true

The employer will always take the best available

The trainees or the inexperienced get hosed

But interesting is that family owned businesses are exempt from these rules, which is why I see a lot o the se family owned mom and pops doing okay, dad works the kitchen, mom at the door, kids waiting tables, uncle mopping floors, etc

Seems to be the only model that will survive if not a major business

I love small business, mom and pop shops, and wish for their success in the community.

That being said, mom and pop shops alone aren't supporting the tax bases of mid-large cities in California. For that you need the Walmarts, Costcos, and Home Depots of the world. If you hit those guys too hard, and they leave.... consequences could be catastrophic.

[Csonka]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I love small business, mom and pop shops, and wish for their success in the community.

That being said, mom and pop shops alone aren't supporting the tax bases of mid-large cities in California. For that you need the Walmarts, Costcos, and Home Depots of the world. If you hit those guys too hard, and they leave.... consequences could be catastrophic.

Those big boys, though, have some pull and could possibly lobby for things that benefit the mom and pops

Who knows. We will see soon enough

[Rkstar71]

$15 /hr or even $90/hr means nothing as long as the rents are too high to afford!

Everytime the minimum wage goes up so do rents! It has nothing to do with a 'market'. It has to do with the greed of landlords.
It needed to be said.

[Rkstar71]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I love small business, mom and pop shops, and wish for their success in the community.

That being said, mom and pop shops alone aren't supporting the tax bases of mid-large cities in California. For that you need the Walmarts, Costcos, and Home Depots of the world. If you hit those guys too hard, and they leave.... consequences could be catastrophic.

"Those guys" meaning the hourly wage workers? Because the low to middle class workers is who pays the most taxes. They are the ones who feel the deductions out of their paychecks the most.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

That's exactly what happens. People who propagate the myth that the minimum wage "creates a wealthier lower class" are fooling themselves.

Employers are market decision makers as well. If they're forced to pay $15 an hour for someone, a wage above the market floor for the position,

No, that's stupid.

If the minimum wage is $15 then $15 is the market floor, not 8.50. You're not allowed to pay 8.50 anymore.

they will pick candidates higher on the totem pole

This never happens because it's still a minimum skill position. You don't need someone who has skills that are higher on the totem pole, and such people will demand a higher wage than you are willing to pay.

Minimum wage proponents lack understanding of this simple concept.

More like, it's been too long since you've tried to get a minimum wage job, so you're the one who doesn't understand how the market works in that situation.

[neutrino78x]

Originally Posted by RationalExpectations

Oh I agree. When the minimum wage goes up to $15, for example, it makes someone who earns $18 in the free market look relatively more desirable to employers.

lol you don't know what you're talking about.

1) such a person would not be interested in being paid less than their current wage

2) you don't need their skill. They are "overqualified".

Why pay $15 for someone who, absent the minimum wage increase, is only worth, say, $8 when I could pay 20% more ($3 more) and get someone who legitimately is over double more ($8 vs. $18)?

Because, dude, now that the minimum is $15, that $20/hr person is now worth like $25 or $30. They aren't in the market for your $15/hr job and will not apply. And if they did, you would be stupid to hire them, because they'll stay for a few weeks and then get something better.

So, here's the thing. In San Jose, $8.50 can't be the minimum wage. Because the median apartment rent is over 2000. So minimum wage should be ((2000/2)*3) per month, because then the person can afford to rent a room inside an apartment at 30% of their monthly salary (well, 33%). So that works out to $18.75. So $15 is still a little low for San Jose, but $8.50 is WAY too low.

Minimum wage isn't supposed to pay for you to have a wife and two kids living in a two bedroom apartment all to yourself in San Jose, BUT it is supposed to mean that you as an individual can afford to have a roof over your head, albeit a shared one.

You can't leave the minimum wage at $8.50 for 50 years, because then you have someone who's working 40 hours per week and would live on the street. The minimum wage is supposed to be a functional wage floor that prevents someone from living on the street if they come to work every day and do an honest day's work.

Surely you agree that someone who works hard for 40 hours per week should not have to live on the street. They shouldn't expect to be able to buy a house in San Jose BUT they SHOULD be able to avoid living on the street. If you agree with that, then you support raising the minimum wage in response to inflation.