$15 min wage in LA is Not enough. It has to be $21/hr

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Um no, jm. To both your statements.
You haven't done it.
And I didn't say I wouldn't believe Jesus Christ. I said, opinion is not fact, whether it comes from the man in the moon or Jesus Christ. Opinion from Jesus would still be just opinion. Now, if he were to resurrect, with facts, and present them logically, then we could have a meaningful conversation.

Over and out jm.

Do you even live in L.A? Or do you just like this board because it's active?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by jm1982

Do you even live in L.A? Or do you just like this board because it's active?

Lmao. What difference does that make with regard to your inability to discern between fact and opinion? You started these same topic threads in the general forum. Several of them. Then you started a couple more in the LA forum. I saw them and responded. Doesn't matter if I live in Timbuktu.

But, since you ask, I live part time in San Diego, part in Morro Bay, and sail summers in Puget Sound Washington a couple months at least.

Now, about your constant opinionation without foundational research and analysis?

[slo1318]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Another opinion piece without data substantiation. It doesn't even provide any evidence that the layoffs were due to rising wages. Layoffs occur all the time in any industry for a wide variety of reasons. Evidence in other places with higher minimum wages shows that minimum wage hikes in of themselves are not job killers. Wage increases may well kill jobs in conjunction with other factors unique to different markets. But, so far, in any of these threads on the recent wage law hike, not one poster has identified a set of criteria that has proven to kill jobs. Nothing but speculative opinion. I'm not saying the hike won't kill jobs. I'm saying that in of itself, wage hikes elsewhere haven't caused the problems opinions are predicting. Give some meat with your opinionated arguments, for cryin out loud.

There are literally hundreds of economist based articles out there that have a range of opinions. Many of which state that it will significantly hurt low wage employment. There are always unintended consequences to this type of legislation. It happened with the ACA to, low wage workers found themselves with maximum 29 hour jobs, so they now get to juggle two jobs.


L.A. labor leaders seek minimum wage exemption for firms with union workers - LA Times

[jm1982]

Originally Posted by slo1318

There are literally hundreds of economist based articles out there that have a range of opinions. Many of which state that it will significantly hurt low wage employment. There are always unintended consequences to this type of legislation. It happened with the ACA to, low wage workers found themselves with maximum 29 hour jobs, so they now get to juggle two jobs.


L.A. labor leaders seek minimum wage exemption for firms with union workers - LA Times

Yes , many liberal economists have mentioned how it's not a good idea and hurts the poor.
Also Jerry Brown a democrat stated the same thing in January . In April he gave into political pressure and the unions and signed it into law anyways .

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by slo1318

There are literally hundreds of economist based articles out there that have a range of opinions. Many of which state that it will significantly hurt low wage employment. There are always unintended consequences to this type of legislation. It happened with the ACA to, low wage workers found themselves with maximum 29 hour jobs, so they now get to juggle two jobs.


L.A. labor leaders seek minimum wage exemption for firms with union workers - LA Times

Yes. There are different "opinions" among economists on these issues. The conversations have been going on for generations. What reality shows us, however, what I have been pointing out is, the amateur prognostications raging here on these forums , that the minimum wage hike will destroy jobs and the economy, is flat out wrong - as people are stating the issue as a single-cause effect.

We know this because: much higher minimum wages exist, and have for many years, in a variety of countries where business continues to flourish profitably in stable economies with low unemployment and high standards of living where quality of life is also rated high. In fact, this occurs in 8 - 12 countries that consistently rate higher than the US for standards of living and quality of life issues.

This does not mean that raising the minimum wage in California will be without negative effects. Perhaps profoundly so. There may be unforeseen co-existing dynamics existing in California that don't exist in the other countries where higher wages have proven successful, that combined with wage increase could be difficult to navigate and cause problems. But, as I keep saying: no one here chatting their heads off has identified such a problem set. The fact that higher minimum wages elsewhere have NOT been insurmountable to profitable businesses, have NOT resulted in significant rises in unemployment, have NOT resulted in lowered standards of living (in fact the opposite), and HAVE increased economic security and consumer spending in the population - sets the bar for investigation. Not a lot of hysterical speculation based on ideologies proven to be counterproductive to the working class interests.

And it is the working class that creates wealth for the business class.

[slo1318]

The countries you cite are tiny with small relatively stagnant populations. This is a sharp change. You're giving an 'uneducated' opinion, that right now isn't right or wrong but is in contrast to other opinions.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by slo1318

The countries you cite are tiny with small relatively stagnant populations. This is a sharp change. You're giving an 'uneducated' opinion, that right now isn't right or wrong but is in contrast to other opinions.

Perhaps you should name the countries you refer to. Germany, for example, is neither small nor "stagnant". Neither is Australia, where the minimum wage is successfully high. Many of the other countries are hardly "stagnant" either boasting higher standards of living and quality of life indexes than the US.

Also, the "sharp change" you refer to is scheduled to take place over a period of six years. So a rate of 10% per year for the transition. If you study the linked chart here:
https://www.dir.ca.gov/iwc/MinimumWageHistory.htm
... you'll see that the rate of change for California in the past two years was greater than that - and businesses and commerce/consumer spending habits have adjusted so far without difficulty. The rate of change for 10 (and more) years prior to that was varied but obviously less. Also arguably retarded relative to worker's needs.

I'm not giving any opinion of the future success of the minimum wage. I am making observations that all the hair on fire hysteria here is based on purely speculative opinion only so far. And my observations are quite educated, as can be evaluated with factual referencing. There is no question but that higher minimum wages in other countries have been entirely successful and have not caused widespread layoffs nor business failures. Period. Fact. Indisputable evidence. I have not declared the same will hold true here in California. I point out that so far no one has identified why CA will be different. The reason for that is: no one knows if it will be different. All prognostications at this point are speciously speculative. I haven't prognosticated.

[slo1318]

10% per year for 5-6 years is enormous. Wish I could get that kind of raise just because. Some companies are still leaving and others threatening or expanding in other states, Carls Jr which is California born is bolting for Tennessee. I do not prefer the Euro model in any way. I lived in Denmark as an exchange student and while they have a nice standard of living its all the same. Its very homogenous and boring. Cost of living is much higher taxes are very high, theyre used to paying more for less. Same really in Australia and New Zealand where Im from and have lots of family. They come here and can not believe what we have access to. Are we over consuming? There are those that would say so, but our system works differently.
Germanys population would be stagnant and declining if not for immigration.

[jm1982]

Yes what you will see is more businesses leaving and closing up each year .
We shouldn't change to the euro model like tulemutt wishes .
It limits success .
I think most of us like America because we have more opportunities and choice rather than less...

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by slo1318

10% per year for 5-6 years is enormous. Wish I could get that kind of raise just because. Some companies are still leaving and others threatening or expanding in other states, Carls Jr which is California born is bolting for Tennessee. I do not prefer the Euro model in any way. I lived in Denmark as an exchange student and while they have a nice standard of living its all the same. Its very homogenous and boring. Cost of living is much higher taxes are very high, theyre used to paying more for less. Same really in Australia and New Zealand where Im from and have lots of family. They come here and can not believe what we have access to. Are we over consuming? There are those that would say so, but our system works differently.
Germanys population would be stagnant and declining if not for immigration.

Why should you get that kind of wage increase? Are you earning at 66% of poverty level now?

As I've pointed out, companies leave all the time for lots of reasons. So what? It's called life and business.

You are entitled to your lifestyle preferences, of course. And so are the worker bees of America who can't afford the kinds of quality of life security that European nations offer their workers. What's boring to you would be an enormous relief and pleasure for ten's of millions of Americans.

It's all quite mute as a point anyway since the whole world is urbanizing and the European lifestyle is a coming reality like it or not. Socialized policy is the only system that can support the levels of population and consumption we are insanely supporting. Don't like it? (I don't) Commit yourself to reversing population by at least 50%.

Are we over consuming? Roflmao you would even pose that question rhetorically.

Germany? What does it matter why it is growing relative to this discussion? It's growing. Stagnating is an interesting term as it infers decay. As if populations can continue to grow indefinitely when it is impossible to grow infinitely in a finite paradigm. Germany's own birth rate, aside from immigrants is below replacement rate. Which is happening to every developed, educated country on the planet. It's what happens when people have the opportunity to use their intelligence and feel secure.

Perpetual growth economics is what's insane. Suicidally.