Alberta Politics Thread

[Locke]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

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

These are people at the absolute lowest tax rates how much do you think the Government gets out of them? Not to mention their wages are deductible to businesses so the Government loses out on that too.

This is primarily an ideological vote purchase without a lot of thought put into it.

[Resolute 14]

I take it, Rouge, that your decision to resort to empty sarcasm is really just an admission that you can't defeat Locke's argument?

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Locke

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?

So everyone gets a raise when minimum wage goes up? If that's the case then you are 100% correct. If not...

Even if what are are saying is correct, the dishwasher gets a 35% raise. The link cook gets a 26% raise, the framer gets a 16% raise. The person at the bottom gets a larger buying power increase, unless everyone will get a 35% raise, and you and I both know that isn't happening.

Food prices might go up, but not by 35%. There are very few businesses where labour is 100% of the cost, but I am am pretty certain that things like supermarkets, restaurants, gas stations, housing, where a large portion of an average person's income goes are not among these. They have so many costs that are not tied to local minimum wage labour that it would be impossible for such an increase to impact their bottom line by the same amount.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Locke

These are people at the absolute lowest tax rates how much do you think the Government gets out of them? Not to mention their wages are deductible to businesses so the Government loses out on that too.

This is primarily an ideological vote purchase without a lot of thought put into it.

Dont disagree with you last at all. Just saying that higher wages = increased taxes and increased consumer prices, in theory.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Dont disagree with you last at all. Just saying that higher wages = increased taxes and increased consumer prices, in theory.

Well Resolute was kind of on point as well.

There will be a redistribution of 'wealth' but not in the way they think there will be.

The first thing that will happens is a bunch of minimum wage earners will be fired. Staffing requirements will dramatically decrease. McDonald's and other fast-food chains have already implemented an electronic ordering process to remove front-line staff.

The ones that are left will likely experience reduced hours and hiring will probably dry up entirely.

So prices are going to go up, service is going to get flushed down the crapper and a number of people who were earning minimum wage will now be earning nothing at all while others will earn more.

Problem solved!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I take it, Rouge, that your decision to resort to empty sarcasm is really just an admission that you can't defeat Locke's argument?

You're welcome to take it any way you like, of course. I just don't think the lowest-paid people in the province have quite the influence we are attributing to them. I know full well that if the minimum wage was to drop by a dollar next year (as opposed to increase by a dollar) we wouldn't see a drop in the price of things we want to buy.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Locke

Well Resolute was kind of on point as well.

There will be a redistribution of 'wealth' but not in the way they think there will be.

The first thing that will happens is a bunch of minimum wage earners will be fired. Staffing requirements will dramatically decrease. McDonald's and other fast-food chains have already implemented an electronic ordering process to remove front-line staff.

The ones that are left will likely experience reduced hours and hiring will probably dry up entirely.

So prices are going to go up, service is going to get flushed down the crapper and a number of people who were earning minimum wage will now be earning nothing at all while others will earn more.

Problem solved!

A dollar or two an hour or going to prevent these ordering machines from coming in? Is not that simple

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

A dollar or two an hour or going to prevent these ordering machines from coming in? Is not that simple

But it isnt 'a dollar or two an hour' its $5.

To put it into perspective at 40 hours a week 52 weeks a year this is an extra $10,000 per year per employee, they assume theres about 400,000 minimum wage earners in Alberta.

Yup. Couple 'o bucks here and there right?

[PsYcNeT]

Eat the rich fiscally solvent.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Rathji

So everyone gets a raise when minimum wage goes up? If that's the case then you are 100% correct. If not...

Even if what are are saying is correct, the dishwasher gets a 35% raise. The link cook gets a 26% raise, the framer gets a 16% raise. The person at the bottom gets a larger buying power increase, unless everyone will get a 35% raise, and you and I both know that isn't happening.

Food prices might go up, but not by 35%. There are very few businesses where labour is 100% of the cost, but I am am pretty certain that things like supermarkets, restaurants, gas stations, housing, where a large portion of an average person's income goes are not among these. They have so many costs that are not tied to local minimum wage labour that it would be impossible for such an increase to impact their bottom line by the same amount.

Excellent post, and you're right to a degree, but you also have to accommodate for fewer hours and positions available.

The whole point is to help all of them right? So you still have to help the workers that are laid off and cant find other work.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Eat the rich fiscally solvent.

Thanks for your help with these insightful, thoughtful, informative and useful posts.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Locke

But it isnt 'a dollar or two an hour' its $5.

To put it into perspective at 40 hours a week 52 weeks a year this is an extra $10,000 per year per employee, they assume theres about 400,000 minimum wage earners in Alberta.

Yup. Couple 'o bucks here and there right?

You're missing the point. Automation is coming regardless of employee wage and the rate is more technology cost driven than wage displacement.

So you're angle is: better to let them work for $10 than not at all. If so, why even have a minimum wage?

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by Locke

Excellent post, and you're right to a degree, but you also have to accommodate for fewer hours and positions available.

The whole point is to help all of them right? So you still have to help the workers that are laid off and cant find other work.

Learned Helplessness

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

You're missing the point. Automation is coming regardless of employee wage and the rate is more technology cost driven than wage displacement.

So you're angle is: better to let them work for $10 than not at all. If so, why even have a minimum wage?

This is pretty much true. The minimum wage debate is rather inconsequential in the long run. We need to figure out a way to support a society where a good portion of the population are unemployed or underemployed. You have automation coming for the service industry, a whole bunch of new technologies that are going to shake up the agriculture industry, and I would imagine as AI advances almost all industries are either going to look drastically different than they do now or cease to exist.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Locke

Excellent post, and you're right to a degree, but you also have to accommodate for fewer hours and positions available.

The whole point is to help all of them right? So you still have to help the workers that are laid off and cant find other work.

Of course some people could be laid off, but it won't be as simple as 3 x $10/hr workers turning into 2 x $15/hr workers. If it was, then the price increases you were previously claiming will happen would be even lower, since the have eaten most of the increased costs by reducing the workforce.

The reality is likely that a little bit of everything will cause the market to equilibrium of these factors:

- Prices will go up a little, which could increase the cost of living for all non-minimum wage workers since even though they might get a small raise, it won't match the minimum wage.
- Workers will have to do a little more for their $5 an hour raise, which is logical.
-Some people, either driven out by the fact that they are expected to do more, work less hours, or can't be paid for because the business was already running as efficiently as possible, will be laid off or just decide not to do the work (students, those supplementing full time income, or retirees). These people might end up on social assistance, EI and cost the taxpayers money
-The businesses might have to accept a smaller profit margin, which could kill some businesses.
- The government will gain some tax income, which could offset some/all of the losses due to increased load on the system due to layoffs

There are too many factors to be sure about what will happen exactly, but the likely end result is that the middle/upper class pay the end costs of this. It's really just a whitewashed form of income redistribution, and if you are against that, it's fine, but framing your arguments without including the whole picture is really disingenuous.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Locke

Thanks for your help with these insightful, thoughtful, informative and useful posts.

actually that one was pretty funny, well I thought so anyway.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by rubecube

This is pretty much true. The minimum wage debate is rather inconsequential in the long run. We need to figure out a way to support a society where a good portion of the population are unemployed or underemployed. You have automation coming for the service industry, a whole bunch of new technologies that are going to shake up the agriculture industry, and I would imagine as AI advances almost all industries are either going to look drastically different than they do now or cease to exist.

The thing is people will be employed. By the military. In the pending war against the machines.

I believe our only hope is that by that point time travel has in fact been not only invented but tested, copyrighted and fit for sale so we don't have to rely on only 1 or 2 people.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Locke

The first thing that will happens is a bunch of minimum wage earners will be fired. Staffing requirements will dramatically decrease. McDonald's and other fast-food chains have already implemented an electronic ordering process to remove front-line staff.

http://globalnews.ca/news/2582516/mc...of-the-future/

McDonald’s Canada says as many as 1,900 new jobs will be created across Alberta as they move forward with plans to redesign over 1,000 of its 1,400 Canadian restaurants.

About 100 McDonald’s locations throughout Alberta have already been revamped and new jobs added at many of those locations.

The redesign will include new self-order kiosks, personalized burger options and improved table service

Among the new positions announced Thursday are dedicated wait staff who will deliver orders from self-order kiosks directly to customers seated at tables

.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

http://globalnews.ca/news/2582516/mc...of-the-future/


.

Part 2 of the "increased jobs" at McDonald's. Have they created new jobs now? Yes. Is this a transitional phase in changing the dynamic of the fast food industry? Yes. Do you believe they plan on keeping all of the old positions of the former era while adding new jobs? I highly highly doubt it. Once they become comfortable with the new operations it wouldn't make any sense to keep the older positions around.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Part 2 of the "increased jobs" at McDonald's. Have they created new jobs now? Yes. Is this a transitional phase in changing the dynamic of the fast food industry? Yes. Do you believe they plan on keeping all of the old positions of the former era while adding new jobs? I highly highly doubt it. Once they become comfortable with the new operations it wouldn't make any sense to keep the older positions around.

Well "highly doubt it" is just speculation I suppose. I can't combat that but appears the older positions will be eliminated right off the bat. New highers will be greeters and servers.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...-ndp-1.3453493

KimTaylor ‎@KimTaylorComms
@RicMcIver actually I covered this launch for CTV. Mcd's says they hired 10-15 MORE per store: greeters and table service.

Guess we'll find out.