Alberta Politics Thread

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

The argument, as supported by facts from the Seattle experiment into arbitrary minimum wage rates is that there are less jobs to apply for. Companies will save money by employing fewer people, or will pick up and move jurisdictions.

Sigh...this again. Completely dishonest.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by ernie

There is an arch to minimum wage hikes. It will do good up to a certain point and then have a detrimental effect. It won't always be a good thing to have an ever increasing minimum wage just as it isn't a good thing to always shout "tax break!".

It has worked well in Minnesota. Seattle - well there seems to be vastly different opinions but the job killing seems to have been fact checked as misleading at best (completely dishonest at worst) from the more reasonable sources I remember reading. Much of the data is convoluted by including the greater metro area which did not see the hike for instance or couldn't be explicitly tied to the hike over other market factors if their was a job loss etc. The Seattle economy right now is doing quite well and the back half of last year (may have) gained many service jobs to end the year in strong positive job gain territory.

Lots of the same fear mongering went on in Minnesota as is going on here. It's great to see people point this out as a negative with the NDP government but there is no proof that small businesses will close up shop because of it.

I look at it as a positive for many reasons, none greater than the fact that nobody should work 40 hours a week and not be able to meet basic needs with the wage provided.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Sigh...this again. Completely dishonest.

Any empirical study on minimum wages is probably misleading or almost immeasurable because there are so few examples to study, and there is basically little way to isolate or properly control for the minimum wage variable either in the data.

At the end of the day if a local economy is performing well with an abundance of high paying jobs, a minimum wage hike won't have much or any impact since the economics driving the sectors that rely on minimum wage employees rides the coattails of the broader economy.

If a local economy is fairing poorly or is in an area of chronic unemployment, a minimum wage hike probably will have a bigger negative impact on the number of jobs available. On the margin a higher cost of doing business is not good for business. The closer the economy is to that margin the higher the impact of imposing an artificial floor on wages that is above the market rate.

Personally my view is that if we instituted the $15/hour minimum wage legislation 5 years ago we probably wouldn't have seen any material impact at the time since the economy was moving so strongly on the back of higher paid employment.

[OMG!WTF!]

There's also a reason these minimum wage "experiments" occur in cities, not statewide. $15 an hour in Calgary is a bit different than $15 an hour in Hanna. Yeah I'll say it, I'd live like a king in Hanna for $15 an hour.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Any empirical study on minimum wages is probably misleading or almost immeasurable because there are so few examples to study, and there is basically little way to isolate or properly control for the minimum wage variable either in the data.

At the end of the day if a local economy is performing well with an abundance of high paying jobs, a minimum wage hike won't have much or any impact since the economics driving the sectors that rely on minimum wage employees rides the coattails of the broader economy.

If a local economy is fairing poorly or is in an area of chronic unemployment, a minimum wage hike probably will have a bigger negative impact on the number of jobs available. On the margin a higher cost of doing business is not good for business. The closer the economy is to that margin the higher the impact of imposing an artificial floor on wages that is above the market rate.

Personally my view is that if we instituted the $15/hour minimum wage legislation 5 years ago we probably wouldn't have seen any material impact at the time since the economy was moving so strongly on the back of higher paid employment.

I don't disagree, just chaps my ass when people say "The facts about the Seattle experiment prove..." because it proves they're clearly talking out of their asses. First of all, Seattle still doesn't have a $15 minimum wage and won't have one universally until 2021. Secondly, all of the articles I've seen quoting various worried business owners have been completely discredited as false or misleading. Finally, if anyone has been to Seattle recently, they'd realize how ridiculous it is to state that the minimum wage is collapsing the local economy. The downtown harbour is undergoing massive redevelopment, as are parts of Belltown and the International District. Granted some of these projects are condos and office buildings buying out local businesses, but saying that anything has been proven by the Seattle experiment is completely dishonest.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't disagree, just chaps my ass when people say "The facts about the Seattle experiment prove..." because it proves they're clearly talking out of their asses. First of all, Seattle still doesn't have a $15 minimum wage and won't have one universally until 2021. Secondly, all of the articles I've seen quoting various worried business owners have been completely discredited as false or misleading. Finally, if anyone has been to Seattle recently, they'd realize how ridiculous it is to state that the minimum wage is collapsing the local economy. The downtown harbour is undergoing massive redevelopment, as are parts of Belltown and the International District. Granted some of these projects are condos and office buildings buying out local businesses, but saying that anything has been proven by the Seattle experiment is completely dishonest.

Considering we all agree that there is a lack of macro economic empirical evidence one way or another, would it not be prudent to lay off this policy at a time when the economy is deteriorating rapidly?

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

Considering we all agree that there is a lack of macro economic empirical evidence one way or another, would it not be prudent to lay off this policy at a time when the economy is deteriorating rapidly?

Is there any evidence that this will hurt our economy? If not then why lay off it. Even the detractors like the Wild Rose Party say things like "protect these jobs for our students" even though reports show who the majority of minimum wage earners are.

Lots of fear mongering, and lots of " need to talk to the businesses that it will impact" statements. Of course a business owner is going to oppose it, it's less profit. Why not talk to the minimum wage earners and see how they live. See the impact that it might have on them.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Is there any evidence that this will hurt our economy? If not then why lay off it. Even the detractors like the Wild Rose Party say things like "protect these jobs for our students" even though reports show who the majority of minimum wage earners are.

Lots of fear mongering, and lots of " need to talk to the businesses that it will impact" statements. Of course a business owner is going to oppose it, it's less profit. Why not talk to the minimum wage earners and see how they live. See the impact that it might have on them.

Lots of talk about 'evidence' and not much in terms of understanding what that even means.

Cowboy sort of nailed it theres a lot of moving parts to this so determining the effectiveness of one variable is difficult.

So while there isnt any evidence that the Seattle experiment has failed there isnt any evidence that it has succeeded in any way either.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Locke

Lots of talk about 'evidence' and not much in terms of understanding what that even means.

Cowboy sort of nailed it theres a lot of moving parts to this so determining the effectiveness of one variable is difficult.

So while there isnt any evidence that the Seattle experiment has failed there isnt any evidence that it has succeeded in any way either.

Seeing as Seattle isn't at a 15 dollar minimum wage yet I can understand how there is no evidence. I believe Minnesota is st 15 dollars, we can llok there if you like.

[Cyclops]

My mistake, it is still being phased in in Minnesota. No negative impacts thus far though. Definitely not the tens of thousands of jobs lost as we have been led to believe will happen.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Seeing as Seattle isn't at a 15 dollar minimum wage yet I can understand how there is no evidence. I believe Minnesota is st 15 dollars, we can llok there if you like.

Sure. Go for it.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sure. Go for it.

So tell me Locke, what are the negatives to raising minimum wage? Are you worried that one of the 8 Tim Hortons in 5 block radius might need to relocate?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Is there any evidence that this will hurt our economy? If not then why lay off it. Even the detractors like the Wild Rose Party say things like "protect these jobs for our students" even though reports show who the majority of minimum wage earners are.

Lots of fear mongering, and lots of " need to talk to the businesses that it will impact" statements. Of course a business owner is going to oppose it, it's less profit. Why not talk to the minimum wage earners and see how they live. See the impact that it might have on them.

The thing about no concrete evidence either way means there's also no evidence it actually helps the people you speak of in a broader sense either. If there's a reduction of employment or hours due to raising the minimum wage, on a net basis raising the minimum wage could actually hurt the very people you're trying to help while hurting the broader economy.

I can tell you with certainty what is not a realistic outcome is the following:

Minimum wage workers make more money completely at the expense of business owners who simply buck up and take less profit all the while maintaining the exact same level of employment, hours, prices charged for their products/services.

Thinking like this is how things would go down is two dimensional and overly simplistic thinking.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

So tell me Locke, what are the negatives to raising minimum wage? Are you worried that one of the 8 Tim Hortons in 5 block radius might need to relocate?

So I take it you're not going to tell us all the ways it worked in Minnesota then?


Incidentally, "relocating" one of those 8 Tim Hortons in a 5 block radius is really just closing one. So what you are actually asking is "Are you worried that a couple dozen people who work in that 5 block radius will lose their jobs?"

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

So tell me Locke, what are the negatives to raising minimum wage? Are you worried that one of the 8 Tim Hortons in 5 block radius might need to relocate?

In this economy? Loss of jobs and/or lack of new jobs. Businesses will just do more with less.


Either that or costs will get passed on to the consumer.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

So tell me Locke, what are the negatives to raising minimum wage? Are you worried that one of the 8 Tim Hortons in 5 block radius might need to relocate?

I'm not going to do the whole epic 'why Locke is again Minimum Wage Increase' rant again. This will probably be the 5th time (?) I've outlined exactly why but I'll give you the coles notes version:

Why raise minimum wage? To help people who have to live on it.

Who are those people? Information suggests that the vast, vast majority of people on minimum wage are very young, or very old and that its supplemental, ie. they're not living on that money they're using it as an addition to regular income.

The number of people who are in dire straights and living off of minimum wage is actually very small, I vaguely recall a number of people under 10,000.

There are more efficient ways to help those people than to give every single person what amounts to a pretty HUGE RAISE.

Secondly by raising everything for everyone you effectively raise nothing for anyone.

The whole point is purchasing power. If you flood the economy with a high minimum wage the cost of everything will increase as a result so their snazzy new $15/hour will buy them exactly the same amount as their last wage did while levying a hefty increase in prices on everyone.

Thats the nutshell of it. If you want the whole meal deal contact a moderator and see if they can dig up my initial posts on it in the original thread.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Locke

I'm not going to do the whole epic 'why Locke is again Minimum Wage Increase' rant again. This will probably be the 5th time (?) I've outlined exactly why but I'll give you the coles notes version:

Why raise minimum wage? To help people who have to live on it.

Who are those people? Information suggests that the vast, vast majority of people on minimum wage are very young, or very old and that its supplemental, ie. they're not living on that money they're using it as an addition to regular income.

The number of people who are in dire straights and living off of minimum wage is actually very small, I vaguely recall a number of people under 10,000.

There are more efficient ways to help those people than to give every single person what amounts to a pretty HUGE RAISE.

Secondly by raising everything for everyone you effectively raise nothing for anyone.

The whole point is purchasing power. If you flood the economy with a high minimum wage the cost of everything will increase as a result so their snazzy new $15/hour will buy them exactly the same amount as their last wage did while levying a hefty increase in prices on everyone.

Thats the nutshell of it. If you want the whole meal deal contact a moderator and see if they can dig up my initial posts on it in the original thread.

While your thinking is correct, unless everyone got the same % raise, it would still increase the purchasing power of those on minimum wage.

Unless you are claiming that the net effect of raising minimum wage is a near identical raise for everyone in the province, on average. This might be true, in the long run, but I would not guess that is the expected result, if all other variables are kept constant.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Rathji

While your thinking is correct, unless everyone got the same % raise, it would still increase the purchasing power of those on minimum wage.

Unless you are claiming that the net effect of raising minimum wage is a near identical raise for everyone in the province, on average. This might be true, in the long run, but I would not guess that is the expected result, if all other variables are kept constant.

Really? Why would you think that?

If the dishwasher is currently making $11 and gets a raise to $15 the line cook who is making $15 will want $19.

The guy stocking the shelves at the supermarket just got a raise, guess where that cost is going to get passed on to? Guess how? Your food just got more expensive. Wonder why?

[EldrickOnIce]

The real winner is probably the government through taxation. For everyone/everything else, we are not entirely sure.

[RougeUnderoos]

I'm shocked SHOCKED I TELLS YOU to learn how massive a role in our economy the very lowest earners have.

Next time I get the chance, I'm going to give the gas jockey, the shelf-stocker, and the person who cleans the office a piece of my mind. Gas, food, rent -- these prices are outrageous!