• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seattle's Wage Hike Not Working

For clarity sake, here is Seattle's wage hike schedule,
http://murray.seattle.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/HkE92YN.jpg
Schedule A will hit $15 an hour in January 2017.
This was discussed at length in the economics thread, I seem to recall
that the rent in Seattle went up by almost the same as the 40 hour take home pay.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...ed-minimum-wage-4.html?highlight=rent+seattle
On April 1, 2015, Seattle increased the minimum wage from $9.75 to $11.00 per hour.
For a full time employee, this would be a monthly increase of $216.25.
From Feb 2015 to Dec 2015 rent on a 1 bedroom increased by $213 per month.
https://www.rentjungle.com/average-r...e-rent-trends/
This means the first step towards $15 /hour yielded the minimum wage employees
a whopping $3.25 a month.
In January of 2016 the minimum wage increased to $13 per hour,
so now the full time minimum wage worker will make an extra $563 per month.
I wonder how much this last increase will "help" the employees.
Click to expand...
As a followup, since Dec 2015, Rent on a Seattle one bedroom has increased
by $177 a month, for those schedule A people who saw the Jan 1 increase to $13 an hour, from $11.
$2 per hour times 160 hours a month = $320, about $250 per month after taxes.
So those lucky enough to see the increase, actually realized a monthly net gain
of ..... $73 dollars a month, maybe dinner and a movie.
 
ludin said:
yep because if they fall below the 30 hour mark they don't have to provide healthcare.
Click to expand...

Ninety-seven percent of US businesses have fewer than fifty full-time employees. More than 96% of those firms that do have fifty or more employees already offer health insurance to their employees. So only one percent of all firms are affected by this requirement.

Master PO said:
since 1913 the dollar as fallen, today it takes over $22 dollars to equal the buying power of the dollar of 1913. people complain theY need more money, but what they need is the buying power of the dollar restored to it former value.
Click to expand...

Incomes have also been affected by inflation, not just prices.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I even do TRIGGER WARNINGS sometimes, because you never know when someone who needs them to function might pop along.

SARCASM ALERT!

:blah:
Click to expand...

:2rofll:

ludin said:
:roll: a dollar is worth a dollar.
go into any dollar store and buy an item they will ask you for 1 dollar.

Now if you are talking about what a dollar can buy that is a bit trickier.
there are many factors that go into the value of the dollar.

Things like inflation affect the price of goods and services.

we also aren't making the same pay that we were in the 1950's either.
you also have to usually work less hours to buy a similar item in 1950.
Click to expand...

Even in 1970. I had a nice home for my family and I was only using half of my take home pay to cover everything....the other half went into savings. The cops today, in the same town, are making 7 times what I made there in 1970......but the homes that were going for $30,000 are now round $800,000+, food is a lot higher, and so are all goods and services.

Moderate Right said:
Employers are also probably figuring in that by cutting hours they will also be cutting not only labor dollars but healthcare dollars as well.
Click to expand...

And there is the big one. Health care and maternity leave, forced on the moderate business owners, is just wrong.
 
Master PO said:
no its not, based on the takeover of the federal reserve of our money.

since 1913 the dollar as fallen, today it takes over $22 dollars to equal the buying power of the dollar of 1913.

the dollar today is around 4 cents today , before the federal reserve the dollar actually at 1 time was worth 1 dollar and 8 cents.

people complain theY need more money, but what they need is the buying power of the dollar restored to it former value.
Click to expand...

Fat chance of that happening with the privately run, Fed Reserve in place!

MrWonka said:
Do you even read the links you post? What this study is saying is that the economy in Seattle is doing so ****ing amazing that workers would have likely seen a raise anyway therefore the minimum wage didn't bump them up that much. Well guess why the economy in Seattle is doing so ****ing amazing? Because almost everyone in the city just got a raise last year. That lead to more spending which actually grew the economy.

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, Washington Metropolitan Unemployment Rate and Total Unemployed | Department of Numbers

Well would you look at that.... The minimum wage took place in Seattle not the entire state of Washington. Well it turns out that Seattle's unemployment rate fell to 4.7% this month which is lower than the national average and a full % point lower than the state overall. As it turns out raising the minimum wage did nothing to kill jobs like conservatives claimed it would. In fact Seattle created even more jobs, and those jobs all pay more than they used to.

Even your own study was required to admit the fact that the wage increase did result in higher pay for workers even if it thinks it was only a few bucks per week. In fact this may indicate another positive benefit of the minimum wage hike that even I hadn't thought of. What it seems to be saying is that on average people at the minimum wage worked 1 less hour per week. It's claiming that their hours are being cut, but I would submit to you that is not actually the case at all. What you're seeing is that some workers who were doing okay before the raise can now afford to work a few hours per week less and still make about the same amount of money. You're seeing students who can afford to work less and focus more on studying. This results in businesses needing to hire additional workers to fill those shift gaps. That may actually improve the economy even further.
Click to expand...

Well, for me, I will stay out of Seattle. Prices are way too high. Same for Portland/Vancouver and SF.

I wonder what the number of business closures has been in Seattle or the business picking up and moving out side the city limits.

Green Hornet said:
Then the article is incorrect, the article uses the same report as the city of Seattle commissioned, that I previously linked. The report does not show minimum wage earners suffered any loss. In the 18 months after the Seattle Minimum Wage Ordinance passed, the City of Seattle’slowest-paid workers experienced a significant increase in wages.
The typical worker earning under $11/hour in Seattle when the City Council voted to raise the minimum wage in June 2014 (“low-wage workers”) earned$11.14 per hour by the end of 2015, an increase from $9.96/hour at the time of passage.The minimum wage contributed to this effect, but the strong economy did as well. We estimate that the minimum wage itself is responsible for a $0.73/hour average increase for low-wage workers...
.
Click to expand...

The minimum wage increase, is just nuts, from a small business owner standpoint.
 
Green Hornet said:
You will find it clearly outlined in the report.
Click to expand...

This is what I read:

The minimum wage appears to have slightly reduced the employment rate of low-wage workers by about one percentage point. It appears that the Minimum Wage Ordinance modestly held back Seattle’s employment of low-wage workers relative to the level we could have expected.

Hours worked among low-wage Seattle workers have lagged behind regional trends, by roughly four hours per quarter (nineteen minutes per week), on average.

Low-wage individuals working in Seattle when the ordinance passed transitioned to jobs outside Seattle at an elevated rate compared to historical patterns.

Increased wages were offset by modest reductions in employment and hours, thereby limiting the extent to which higher wages directly translated into higher average earnings. At most, 25% of the observed earnings gains—around a few dollars a week, on average—can be attributed to the minimum wage.​

Did I miss anything?
 
MickeyW said:
Fat chance of that happening with the privately run, Fed Reserve in place!



Well, for me, I will stay out of Seattle. Prices are way too high. Same for Portland/Vancouver and SF.

I wonder what the number of business closures has been in Seattle or the business picking up and moving out side the city limits.



The minimum wage increase, is just nuts, from a small business owner standpoint.
Click to expand...

ask yourself why does the u.s. not make the dollar stronger?

because they are in massive debt and to do so, would make them pay a massive sum of money to its creditors

the u.s. first removed gold from it money in the 30's then sliver in the 60's and the change you hold in you hand is worth less then its face value
.
 
longview said:
For clarity sake, here is Seattle's wage hike schedule,
http://murray.seattle.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/HkE92YN.jpg
Schedule A will hit $15 an hour in January 2017.
This was discussed at length in the economics thread, I seem to recall
that the rent in Seattle went up by almost the same as the 40 hour take home pay.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...ed-minimum-wage-4.html?highlight=rent+seattle

As a followup, since Dec 2015, Rent on a Seattle one bedroom has increased
by $177 a month, for those schedule A people who saw the Jan 1 increase to $13 an hour, from $11.
$2 per hour times 160 hours a month = $320, about $250 per month after taxes.
So those lucky enough to see the increase, actually realized a monthly net gain
of ..... $73 dollars a month, maybe dinner and a movie.
Click to expand...

... or a car payment, doctor or dentist visit, better quality groceries, an electric bill or a myriad of other things poor people need. Of which a $75 dinner and a movie isn't one.
 
Critter7r said:
... or a car payment, doctor or dentist visit, better quality groceries, an electric bill or a myriad of other things poor people need. Of which a $75 dinner and a movie isn't one.
Click to expand...
Ok, poor example, but I was just showing the increase from $9.75 to $13, would not have changed much
in the lives of the minimum wage worker.
 
MickeyW said:
Well, for me, I will stay out of Seattle. Prices are way too high. Same for Portland/Vancouver and SF.

I wonder what the number of business closures has been in Seattle or the business picking up and moving out side the city limits.
Click to expand...

Again...did you read the article at all? It's stating that the reason the minimum wage hike didn't appear to help much is because the economy is doing so phenomenally well that wages were probably going to increase anyway. Seattle is creating jobs and businesses like wildfire.

In fact just last night I was talking to a buddy of mine from Seattle about an old girlfriend that was looking to move there and trying to find an apartment. He said he could maybe talk to some people, but the housing situation is insane. It's impossible to find an apartment. While it may suck paying a lot for an apartment the reality is that is a very good sign. It means that tons and tons of people want to live in Seattle. That's what causes prices to go up. The demand for housing in Seattle is outpacing their ability to build new homes. Most cities would kill to have that "problem."
 
Master PO said:
the metal value of the coins in your hands, are worth less then face value.......YOUR WRONG!
Click to expand...

You said "face value," not the value of the materials. And you've been properly critterfied for yer error.
 
ocean515 said:
This is what I read:

The minimum wage appears to have slightly reduced the employment rate of low-wage workers by about one percentage point. It appears that the Minimum Wage Ordinance modestly held back Seattle’s employment of low-wage workers relative to the level we could have expected.

Hours worked among low-wage Seattle workers have lagged behind regional trends, by roughly four hours per quarter (nineteen minutes per week), on average.

Low-wage individuals working in Seattle when the ordinance passed transitioned to jobs outside Seattle at an elevated rate compared to historical patterns.

Increased wages were offset by modest reductions in employment and hours, thereby limiting the extent to which higher wages directly translated into higher average earnings. At most, 25% of the observed earnings gains—around a few dollars a week, on average—can be attributed to the minimum wage.​

Did I miss anything?
Click to expand...

If that is all you get out of 50 page report you are missing quite a bit. The study also found that, relative to historical trends, the rate at which low-wage workers affected by the increase stayed employed rose by about three percentage points. For workers in the control group, it was up four points. So, absent the minimum-wage increase, there’d arguably be one percentage point more affected workers employed in Seattle.
 
Master PO said:
i had a point and its correct, the u.s. has devalued its money, and made the dollar have less power.
Click to expand...

That has little to nothing to do with the topic, it so off point it is out there with Pluto.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom