5 ms·

Further than $7.25, $10, $11, $12, or $14/hr. Progress is still progress.

by yardie 8y ago

gwright 8y ago
What is the limiting principle? Why stop at the now magical $15/hour? If $15 is better than $14 then why wouldn't $16 be better yet? Once upon a time I was having an in person discussion with someone deeply involved in these sorts of policy discussions and I jokingly said that the law should just be $50/hour since that would obviously be better than $10/$12/$15. To my astonishment this person proceeded to explain that it would indeed be a good idea because everyone would have more money to spend and so this change would be a boost to the economy. Absolutely no acknowledgment that there might be unintended consequences to a $50/hour minimum wage.
- moosey 8y ago
  I wish we could test it. I wish there was a way to build an economic area, and a very large one, to test such ideas. What if life is seriously better on the other side? I certainly wish that there was a floor to poverty that is more than what our minimum wage offers today, even if you weren't working, and I believe it possible. Fortunately, in Scandinavia and Europe you are starting to see such ideas tested. Living in WA, I'm excited with the increases in the minimum wage, and if they work out well, I hope that society is brave enough to test higher ones until the positive effects are lost.
  - StudentStuff 8y ago
    The increase in minimum wage has definitely culled many under-performing restaurants and businesses in Seattle (essentially the death of middling Teriyaki shops). I appreciate the change, its refreshing to see room in the market that has allowed new & interesting businesses to fill the spaces said under-performing businesses used to fill, providing much needed variety.
    - gwright 8y ago
      So you are OK with all those employees losing their job because the government decided the minimum wage was too low? How do you justify calling those businesses "under-performing"? What is the limiting principle here? How do you intended to evaluate the next proposed government intervention? Is it enough for you that that there are good intentions regardless of the consequences? I propose that we ban all fast food restaurants. They obviously aren't good for us. Let's make room for more interesting businesses. Think of all that valuable real estate that can be repurposed! Next let's limit the amount of soda and alcohol you can purchase or maybe just ban them entirely since they are unhealthy. And let's force all "under-performing" businesses to close shop. Those resources should be redirected to more healthy businesses! Obviously the business owners are incompetent since they are "under-performing". We need to make sure these people aren't burning through their life savings in their "under-performing" business. Carbs are bad for you also, as is meat protein so let's ration the amounts you can purchase or maybe require producers of these products to be licensed and only allow them to produce the "right" quantity of these products as determined by the "government". Where does it end?
      - StudentStuff 8y ago
        > So you are OK with all those employees losing their job because the government decided the minimum wage was too low? With the lower end of the job market being flooded with work in Seattle, there isn't much reason to fear. There are many more job openings than workers offering full time as part of a union shop (Fred Meyer & QFC). As to the rest of your whataboutism, I have no desire to interact with that. Its a crappy debate tactic :P
        gwright 8y ago
        So I did get a little carried away, but the point is that once you've decided the it is OK for the government to regulate at this level, there is no room for complaining when government wants to intervene in anything else. We are in the realm of "trust the government, it knows what is best for us". If it is rational for the government to have the power to set a minimum wage then wouldn't it also be reasonable for the government to decide that all software developers need to be licensed? What is the limiting principle? You accuse me of "whataboutism" as if I am ignoring some limiting principle that is obvious but I don't see any limiting principle being followed at all and I find that alarming.
  - Proven 8y ago
    LOL!! What is there to test? Do you need a test to figure out whether $1,000/second would work out? Sadly, like many philosopher kings on this site you don’t even suspect that the current, free market prices might be the answer as to the appropriate (minimum) pay for each individual case.

Further than $7.25, $10, $11, $12, or $14/hr. Progress is still progress.

by yardie 8y ago

Further than $7.25, $10, $11, $12, or $14/hr. Progress is still progress.

What is the limiting principle? Why stop at the now magical $15/hour? If $15 is better than $14 then why wouldn't $16 be better yet? Once upon a time I was having an in person discussion with someone deeply involved in these sorts of policy discussions and I jokingly said that the law should just be $50/hour since that would obviously be better than $10/$12/$15. To my astonishment this person proceeded to explain that it would indeed be a good idea because everyone would have more money to spend and so this change would be a boost to the economy. Absolutely no acknowledgment that there might be unintended consequences to a $50/hour minimum wage.

moosey 8y ago
I wish we could test it. I wish there was a way to build an economic area, and a very large one, to test such ideas. What if life is seriously better on the other side? I certainly wish that there was a floor to poverty that is more than what our minimum wage offers today, even if you weren't working, and I believe it possible. Fortunately, in Scandinavia and Europe you are starting to see such ideas tested. Living in WA, I'm excited with the increases in the minimum wage, and if they work out well, I hope that society is brave enough to test higher ones until the positive effects are lost.
- StudentStuff 8y ago
  The increase in minimum wage has definitely culled many under-performing restaurants and businesses in Seattle (essentially the death of middling Teriyaki shops). I appreciate the change, its refreshing to see room in the market that has allowed new & interesting businesses to fill the spaces said under-performing businesses used to fill, providing much needed variety.
  - gwright 8y ago
    So you are OK with all those employees losing their job because the government decided the minimum wage was too low? How do you justify calling those businesses "under-performing"? What is the limiting principle here? How do you intended to evaluate the next proposed government intervention? Is it enough for you that that there are good intentions regardless of the consequences? I propose that we ban all fast food restaurants. They obviously aren't good for us. Let's make room for more interesting businesses. Think of all that valuable real estate that can be repurposed! Next let's limit the amount of soda and alcohol you can purchase or maybe just ban them entirely since they are unhealthy. And let's force all "under-performing" businesses to close shop. Those resources should be redirected to more healthy businesses! Obviously the business owners are incompetent since they are "under-performing". We need to make sure these people aren't burning through their life savings in their "under-performing" business. Carbs are bad for you also, as is meat protein so let's ration the amounts you can purchase or maybe require producers of these products to be licensed and only allow them to produce the "right" quantity of these products as determined by the "government". Where does it end?
    - StudentStuff 8y ago
      > So you are OK with all those employees losing their job because the government decided the minimum wage was too low? With the lower end of the job market being flooded with work in Seattle, there isn't much reason to fear. There are many more job openings than workers offering full time as part of a union shop (Fred Meyer & QFC). As to the rest of your whataboutism, I have no desire to interact with that. Its a crappy debate tactic :P
      - gwright 8y ago
        So I did get a little carried away, but the point is that once you've decided the it is OK for the government to regulate at this level, there is no room for complaining when government wants to intervene in anything else. We are in the realm of "trust the government, it knows what is best for us". If it is rational for the government to have the power to set a minimum wage then wouldn't it also be reasonable for the government to decide that all software developers need to be licensed? What is the limiting principle? You accuse me of "whataboutism" as if I am ignoring some limiting principle that is obvious but I don't see any limiting principle being followed at all and I find that alarming.
- Proven 8y ago
  LOL!! What is there to test? Do you need a test to figure out whether $1,000/second would work out? Sadly, like many philosopher kings on this site you don’t even suspect that the current, free market prices might be the answer as to the appropriate (minimum) pay for each individual case.