Why in the name of God, don't you want to be paid more.

Yeah, I had to explain this to a co-worker using charts from the Department of Labor.

Eventually what clicked for him was explaining "Having a higher minimum wages forces companies who want specifically skilled labor to pay more because why should I go learn Javascript if it pays less than working for McDonalds?"

It really sunk in when I showed him the department of labor graph that shows wages flatlined in 1978 but inflation continued. Clearly inflation is not connected to wages.

It’s not? I thought it was.

People who make more spend more. Which helps the economy.

It could also be cheaper to automate jobs for companies that can afford the $15/hour.

Automation is indeed the biggest danger to the Average Worker

"but I'm afraid that doing so would cause companies to lay off employees if they can't afford to pay them all a higher rate"

I can understand the worry. But if we give people more buying power, demand increases. If demand increases, so do jobs. And as such I feel it balances out and tips towards tge positive, but I am sure a lot of people will be screwed over and as such I suggest a Governemnt program to help these individuals.

Economics usually is. In the grand scheme of things that is.

Prices also go up because it takes more money to make the same product. And people need to live in the present, rather than the future.

But with tge increase of prices so does tge salary increase and were not talking about every job here. Mostly McDonalds and gas Stations. If you want to tell me they can't afford 15$ per hour, I don't know what to tell you.

McDonalds used a franchise system where many of the restaurants are not owned by the corporation, but rather a small businessman, therefore it is quite possible the owners would not be able to pay such.

Also if 15/hour become the min, then other jobs would be required to pay more to be competitive in the job market and paying people more doesn't increase the value of their labor causing inflation.

"therefore it is quite possible the owners would not be able to pay such."

*Snort*

No. Its McDonalds. I don't care how they organise things, but they definetly can pay for it. I've eaten enough McDonalds to personally cover their wages for the next twenty years (Exaggeration)

So see the McChicken Classic Menu costs 7.99€ in total. Assuming the min. Wage is 15€ All they'd have to do is sell two Menus every hour and then the costs are covered. And thats assuming they sell /only/ the McChicken classic and /only/ twice per hour and that other costs are covered. Its definetly doable for McDonalds, they aren't a global fast food chain without reason. They Don't do it, because its cheaper to pay 8.80€ per hour than it is 15€.

"Also if 15/hour become the min, then other jobs would be required to pay more to be competitive in the job market"

What other jobs? This is the minimum Wage we are talking about. This would only effect the low paying jobs. Normal jobs will not be effected directly. Additionally that would only spurr on the economy.

"paying people more doesn't increase the value of their labor causing inflation"

It doesn't true, but it increases their buying power enabling them to buy more and thus creating more demand and by dirrect correlation economic growth.

I'm sorry if you do not care about facts that make your argument flat out wrong. You're all for hurting small business owner because they partner with a larger business by not making the distinction between the two.

And no, it wouldn't also affect only low paying jobs. It's like you do not understand the economy is interconnected and thus competition for labor, price increases to offset higher wages, and inflation affect a much larger section of the economy.

And as inflation, price increases, and job losses kick in, buying power then decreases and economic growth is offset, so you can even make the min wage earnings worse off if you ham fistedly change things with blind increases in wages and hurt everyone else in on fell swoop.

"I'm sorry if you do not care about facts that make your argument flat out wrong. "

A) Unnecessary provocation B) I am arguing your points, there is a difference between that and outright denying

"You're all for hurting small business owner because they partner with a larger business by not making the distinction between the two."

McDonalds... is not a small business.

"And no, it wouldn't also affect only low paying jobs."

Well indirectly it'll effect the economy, duh. But directly it would only effect low paying jobs.

"competition for labor, price increases to offset higher wages, and inflation affect a much larger section of the economy."

Yes all true. But raising the min. Wage hurts /No one/

"And as inflation, price increases, and job losses kick in"

If. If. A lot of places have high minimum wages and they are doing fine. You are being unreasonable. Why exactly are you opposed to being paid more?

"with blind increases in wages and hurt everyone else in on fell swoop."

We aren't handing out 100s of Dollars to make them happen. It'll be an increase in the single digest. Hardly anything that would hurt the economy

A, No it isn't. You dismissed fact that utterly change what you talking about to a different paradigm. B as you said you didn't care about these facts, you are not arguing my points, but dismissing this point utterly.

"McDonalds... is not a small business." Here is the proof you're ignoring the facts you do not like and thus ignoring the actual point that I made.

"Yes all true. But raising the min. Wage hurts /No one/"
Utterly false. Even with a basic understanding of economics you'd note that making something more expensive and thus reduces demand. in other words it will cost some people their jobs. And what you agreed with as true also hurts people as well.

"If. If. A lot of places have high minimum wages and they are doing fine. You are being unreasonable. Why exactly are you opposed to being paid more?"
In addition to assuming I'm against people being paid more, you also assume your end point that wage increases to no harm, to counter harm that it causes. A circular argument.

"We aren't handing out 100s of Dollars to make them happen. It'll be an increase in the single digest. Hardly anything that would hurt the economy"
Try doing at least a little reading on the subject.
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-07/CBO-55410-MinimumWage2019.pdf

""if you do not know by now your willful ignorant of the small business that it'll hurt."

McDonalds is not a Small Businesses go***amn it!

"You also said it'll hurt no one, that is directly the opposite of what you say here."

Then I misspoke

"prove none of your"

lol only if you look at the Cons, the explicit reason i chose those links was because they proved both of our viewpoints and because it was fair to also acknowledge that you have legitimate arguments, even I have not said it so far. And as a sort of apology for failing to provide adequate links before

But if you want to be an ass about it...

"Additionally it would be impossible to prove that you didn't search after I called out. So you are in a situation where you cannot prove my statement wrong, and act like you have, showing biases. I really cannot know either way and stated you lack of knowledge make it seem so."

What...

I plain and simple said that I didn't really research the topic. Your reading too far into things

"McDonalds is not a Small Businesses" LOL, you're still ignoring what the franchise system is, where small business owner own individual McDs restaurants.. As you have done so multiple times, at this point only willful ignorant of the fact that small business owner own individual MdDs restaurants is clear. The icing on the cake is you started with you didn't care about these facts.

"lol only if you look at the Cons,"
Except that's not what your been arguing, you've been calling my points wrong. I at no point have said the positives do not exist, but pointing out negatives exist as well. You keep saying that they do not or really down playing them.

"I plain and simple said that I didn't really research the topic. Your reading too far into things"
Well I take this as a mistyping, rather than an admission of guilt.

"A, No it isn't. You dismissed fact that utterly change what you talking about to a different paradigm."

Where?

"B as you said you didn't care about these facts, you are not arguing my points, but dismissing this point utterly"

I don't think so

"Here is the proof you're ignoring the facts you do not like and thus ignoring the actual point that I made."

Right. Mcdonalds is a conglomerate. Just cause its made up of 5k small-mid bussniessmen-women doesn't mean they can't afford to pay a few more dollars.

"you'd note that making something more expensive and thus reduces demand."

Perhaps, these cheap ass noodles will cost a dollar more. God I can't afford that anymore. And giving people more money increases their buying power, which they use to buy stuff, which creates jobs and jobs are good for the economy.

"in other words it will cost some people their jobs."

And thats where the Government proper comes in with a system to catch those unlucky people who have been negatively effected and help them back up.

"your end point that wage increases to no harm, to counter harm that it causes."

Before my previous point, I said nothing about Min. Wages being harmful. I have been arguing against it

"Try doing at least a little reading on the subject.
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-07/CBO-55410-MinimumWage2019.pdf"

I did

chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/https://edlabor.house.gov/imo/media/doc/FactSheet-RaisingTheMinimumWageIsGoodForWorkers,Businesses,andTheEconomy-FINAL.pdf

https://www.epi.org/publication/why-america-needs-a-15-minimum-wage/

https://www.epi.org/publication/minimum-wage-testimony-feb-2019/

"Where" McDonald's doesn't own all it's restaurants. Rather small they have other people that run and operate them separately, these people are often small business owners. That is called the franchise system, as I said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchising

"I don't think so" yep, I never said McD's was a small business. rather the restaurants are often own by small businessman, that is called the franchise system.

"Perhaps, these cheap ass noodles will cost a dollar more." Job loss. That's what I mentioned that you cut and pretended I didn't say.

"Before my previous point, I said nothing about Min. Wages being harmful. I have been arguing against it" Nice to miss read me, I'm saying it causes harm, you when you agreed to harm like inflation you then said that isn't harm.

"And thats where the Government proper comes in with a system to catch those unlucky people who have been negatively effected and help them back up." So in other words you admit to harm after saying it doesn't exist. Welfare is a secondary drain on the economy though taxes that can harm everyone.

"I did" If you actually did, then you intentionally lied to me. What you gave me was a partisan democratic party propaganda piece and a lobbing group with a liberal bias connect to the labor movement. Neither of which prove not harm exists even if all what they say is true. Therefor I conclude you didn't actually research your statement.

"That is called the franchise system, as I said. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franchising"

Thats cool and all, but you point is?

"Job loss. That's what I mentioned that you cut and pretended I didn't say."

I did acknowledge that some would be negatively effected. Therefore govt. program

"Nice to miss read me, I'm saying it causes harm, you when you agreed to harm like inflation you then said that isn't harm."

I agreed that Inflation /Could/ be spurred on by a Min Wage. I agree that inflation is bad, If you precive a previous comment to say something else then A) I miss formulated or B) You misunderstood. Either way that is my position on the matter. Now if I believe that to be likely is another case.

"So in other words you admit to harm after saying it doesn't exist."

Where did I deny that the an increase Min Wage wouldn't have some negative effects? If you think I meant that by saying "I don't think the Min Wage is Harmful" I meant that in a general overall sense as I believe it would support the economy in the long term

The entire part about govt intervention is about helping those negatively effected

"Therefor I conclude you didn't actually research your statement."

Oh no. You caught me. Its true. My research was a five minute google seacrh

"https://minimum-wage.procon.org/"

"https://www.thebalancecareers.com/pros-and-cons-of-raising-the-minimum-wage-2062521"

"https://toggl.com/pros-and-cons-of-raising-minimum-wage/"

"https://vittana.org/18-should-minimum-wage-be-raised-pros-and-cons"

"https://bizfluent.com/info-8315371-advantages-disadvantages-raising-minimum-wage.html"

"https://connectusfund.org/15-major-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-minimum-wage-for-workers"

So here. I do need to coincide a few things, but so do you

"Thats cool and all, but you point is?" I've explained it three times, if you do not know by now your willful ignorant of the small business that it'll hurt.

"I did acknowledge that some would be negatively effected. Therefore govt. program" You also said it'll hurt no one, that is directly the opposite of what you say here.

"Where did I deny that the an increase Min Wage wouldn't have some negative effects?" Where you said it would harm no one.

"Oh no. You caught me. Its true. My research was a five minute google search"
Sure looks it. Your first link after this quote proves several of your previous statements false, and going though the rest provide citations for most of my arguments and prove none of your.

Additionally it would be impossible to prove that you didn't search after I called out. So you are in a situation where you cannot prove my statement wrong, and act like you have, showing biases. I really cannot know either way and stated you lack of knowledge make it seem so.

So either you didn't actual research, or you are lying (intentionally or not) when you state no one would be harmed and the economy wouldn't be harmed if done wrong.

Good question. Wondered that myself. I thought it was because corporate execs want their same bottom line profits so to offset the increased labor expenditure..they would cut jobs expecting the $15/HR employee to do the work of 2 ppl. And those with more education and specialty skills would demand more and also have their labor force cut by corporations to meet that demand. So it's really a question of greed. It's not that the company's don't have the ability to pay more... It's that they are used to a certain bottom line profit Z based on certain expenditures X & Y . If you double X--->2X and want to maintain Z at ALL COSTS b/c you really don't care about anyone but your shareholders ...well like R.Reagan used to say "well, there you go. " small businesses are a different animal. Like a cat compared to a Lion. Maybe there should be some type of sliding scale minimum wage so those businesses with fewer than 10 employees could remain giving a portion of the new $15/HR minimum wage. 👍