- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:13 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
the wage hike may have come at a significant cost: The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers,
Economists have known this for years. Card and Krugers (1994) paper is the main paper people go to as evidence that a minimum wage helps. Economists have widely dismissed that paper and Card and Kruger have even mentioned it was flawed.
When will simple reason even get through these peoples heads?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:15 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
They've got quite a ways to get to $15 + Seattle has been riding an economic boom that has temporarily insulated some of the impact. When the dust settles that city is in trouble, the metro should be bumping tho.
Sucks for the little guy in Seattle but this is a needed step to end the push for $15.
Sucks for the little guy in Seattle but this is a needed step to end the push for $15.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:16 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
People with a working brain told them this was going to happen.
Minimum wage jobs aren't meant to sustain a family of 10.
Minimum wage jobs aren't meant to sustain a family of 10.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:18 pm to RemouladeSawce
quote:
They've got quite a ways to get to $15 + Seattle has been riding an economic boom that has temporarily insulated some of the impact. When the dust settles that city is in trouble, the metro should be bumping tho.
The airport increase emboldened the city into thinking it could work. Airport travelers have a much more inelastic demand for services (which is largely the market for the airport) than the city does. This was easy to see coming from miles away.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 12:19 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
When you read it slowly, you see that it is not that big of a deal.
One of the biggest cities in the country dramatically raised wages and the result was a job loss of 5,000. A drop in the bucket for a city of that size.
I'd take that deal if I was Seattle.
One of the biggest cities in the country dramatically raised wages and the result was a job loss of 5,000. A drop in the bucket for a city of that size.
I'd take that deal if I was Seattle.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:48 pm to Eurocat
quote:
When you read it slowly, you see that it is not that big of a deal. One of the biggest cities in the country dramatically raised wages and the result was a job loss of 5,000. A drop in the bucket for a city of that size. I'd take that deal if I was Seattle.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:52 pm to Eurocat
quote:
g of a deal. One of the biggest cities in the country dramatically raised wages and the result was a job loss of 5,000. A drop in the bucket for a city of that size. I'd take that deal if I was Seattle.
You didn't read the article for comprehension. There was no net gain for the city. Overall wages fell. Why should Seattle take that "deal," speaking economically, not socially. And the long-term effects are likely to be more pronounced, not less.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:58 pm to the808bass
Wait till Cali goes all in on single payer health care 
You haven't seen anything yet.
You haven't seen anything yet. 
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:08 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
I bet they wish someone would have warned them about this
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:39 pm to Eurocat
quote:Which basically proves you're a complete moron economically speaking.
One of the biggest cities in the country dramatically raised wages and the result was a job loss of 5,000. A drop in the bucket for a city of that size.
First off, Seattle is the 20th largest city. If the other 19 duplicated this batch of genius, that would be 100K jobs. And THAT's being VERY kind because Seattle's population is about 700K.
Oh, and how mighty privileged of you that you'd "take that deal" given that the lost jobs likely hit low wage earners almost exclusively.
Given that minimum wage workers typically make up about 4% of the population and given the total working age adults in Seattle, the MOST favorable calculation possible says that about 1 in 3 of those frickers lost their jobs.
You fricking tard
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:42 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Liberals must be brain dead if this news shocks them. Econ 101 in action.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:48 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
lol at seattle
sneakily ridding themselves of their underclass
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:49 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers, and a drop in hours for those who kept their jobs
Huh. Who'd have guessed that would happen?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:52 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
The lol is on the American taxpayer who subsidize low wage employees in the form of benefits. Isn't that funny?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:52 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
The lol is on the American taxpayer who subsidize low wage employees in the form of benefits. Isn't that funny?
Liberals REALLY love to tell this lie.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:53 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:
sneakily ridding themselves of their underclass
And don't you think for a minute they won't basically brag about the result.
Oh, they won't say, "look, we're liberal and we got rid of the poor".
No, they'll say, "look, our liberal city is super clean and has low crime".
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:54 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:
The lol is on the American taxpayer who subsidize low wage employees in the form of benefits. Isn't that funny?
Who takes more benefits? Someone earning 7.25 an hour or someone earning 0 dollars an hour?
You do realize there are 5,000 additional unemployed people in seattle right now directly because of this law, correct? You don't think they get benefits?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:55 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Who takes more benefits? Someone earning 7.25 an hour or someone earning 0 dollars an hour?
That's why that liberal stupidity is so funny.
Woman has no job. Gets max in benefits.
Woman gets job. Requirement for benefits goes down.
Liberal - "Look, that company that hired her is COSTING the government money".
It takes such an immense level of dishonesty or stupidity that it's just incredible to watch.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 2:14 pm to Lakeboy7
quote:So if they had no job and no wage, would the subsidies/benefits be higher or lower?
The lol is on the American taxpayer who subsidize low wage employees in the form of benefits. Isn't that funny?
Typical liberal bullshite.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 2:15 pm
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News