• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

About those restaurants closing in Seattle because of the looming $15 minimum wage

ksen

Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,540
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Calvinist
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...e-restaurant-ragnarok-not-actually-happening/

The New York Post editorial board, American Enterprise Institute scholar Mark Perry, Forbes contributor Tim Worstall, and Rush Limbaugh all cited a Seattle Magazine article from March 4 that claimed a “rash of shutterings” was afoot in the Seattle restaurant world. The magazine suggested that the minimum wage law might be a contributing factor in the closures of the Boat Street Cafe, Little Uncle, Grub, and Shanik.

“That’s weird,” Boat Street Cafe owner Renee Erickson told the Seattle Times when fact-checkers emailed to confirm the Seattle Magazine story. “No, that’s not why I’m closing Boat Street.” Erickson’s three other restaurants remain open, and two brand new ones are in the works in Seattle. “Opening more businesses would not be smart if I felt it was going to hinder my success,” said Erickson, who described herself as “totally on board with the $15 min.”

Poncharee Koungpunchart and Wiley Frank of Little Uncle “were never interviewed for these articles,” they told the paper. They are closing one of their two locations, “but pre-emptively closing a restaurant seven years before the full effect of the law takes place seems preposterous to us.” Frank reportedly asked one conservative writer who had picked up the wage-menace red herring to “not make assumptions about our business to promote your political values.”

The owner of Shanik told the Times that closing has “nothing to do with wages,” and Grub’s owner explained that they’re being bought out and rebranded by new ownership because the breakfast and sandwich bistro has been “a huge success.”

The Seattle Magazine article itself notes that new restaurants are opening at a healthy clip around the city, and that the Capitol Hill neighborhood is in the middle of “an unprecedented dining boom.” And while numbers compiled by data wonk Evan Soltas offer only an imprecise snapshot of restaurant employment in the Seattle area, the empirical evidence shows “no sign of a minimum-wage hit to employment.” These details did not make it into the punditry that initially swirled around the article’s suggestion that some closures might relate to the wage law. Forbes’ Worstall published a follow-up piece insisting that his point stands despite the crumbling narrative of specific Seattle restaurant closures. AEI’s Price has not yet responded to an request for comment.

They're not really closing becuase of the wage hike.

Sorry conservatives, but best of luck with the new arguments when you get them.
 
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...e-restaurant-ragnarok-not-actually-happening/

The New York Post editorial board, American Enterprise Institute scholar Mark Perry, Forbes contributor Tim Worstall, and Rush Limbaugh all cited a Seattle Magazine article from March 4 that claimed a “rash of shutterings” was afoot in the Seattle restaurant world. The magazine suggested that the minimum wage law might be a contributing factor in the closures of the Boat Street Cafe, Little Uncle, Grub, and Shanik.

“That’s weird,” Boat Street Cafe owner Renee Erickson told the Seattle Times when fact-checkers emailed to confirm the Seattle Magazine story. “No, that’s not why I’m closing Boat Street.” Erickson’s three other restaurants remain open, and two brand new ones are in the works in Seattle. “Opening more businesses would not be smart if I felt it was going to hinder my success,” said Erickson, who described herself as “totally on board with the $15 min.”

Poncharee Koungpunchart and Wiley Frank of Little Uncle “were never interviewed for these articles,” they told the paper. They are closing one of their two locations, “but pre-emptively closing a restaurant seven years before the full effect of the law takes place seems preposterous to us.” Frank reportedly asked one conservative writer who had picked up the wage-menace red herring to “not make assumptions about our business to promote your political values.”

The owner of Shanik told the Times that closing has “nothing to do with wages,” and Grub’s owner explained that they’re being bought out and rebranded by new ownership because the breakfast and sandwich bistro has been “a huge success.”

The Seattle Magazine article itself notes that new restaurants are opening at a healthy clip around the city, and that the Capitol Hill neighborhood is in the middle of “an unprecedented dining boom.” And while numbers compiled by data wonk Evan Soltas offer only an imprecise snapshot of restaurant employment in the Seattle area, the empirical evidence shows “no sign of a minimum-wage hit to employment.” These details did not make it into the punditry that initially swirled around the article’s suggestion that some closures might relate to the wage law. Forbes’ Worstall published a follow-up piece insisting that his point stands despite the crumbling narrative of specific Seattle restaurant closures. AEI’s Price has not yet responded to an request for comment.

They're not really closing becuase of the wage hike.

Sorry conservatives, but best of luck with the new arguments when you get them.

Uh, no one at all has ever doubted that it is possible to increase employment and the minimum wage at the same time. The impact of the general economy is usually going to be larger than the impact of the minimum wage. Furthermore, restaurants can stay open but make due with fewer employees. Restaurants in Washington state (which face the second highest minimum wage in the nation, second only to Washignton DC) average 14 employees per restaurant compared to the natural average of 17.

http://www.seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

You are refuting a strawman.
 
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...e-restaurant-ragnarok-not-actually-happening/



They're not really closing becuase of the wage hike.

Sorry conservatives, but best of luck with the new arguments when you get them.

Uh, no one at all has ever doubted that it is possible to increase employment and the minimum wage at the same time. The impact of the general economy is usually going to be larger than the impact of the minimum wage. Furthermore, restaurants can stay open but make due with fewer employees. Restaurants in Washington state (which face the second highest minimum wage in the nation, second only to Washignton DC) average 14 employees per restaurant compared to the natural average of 17.

http://www.seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

You are refuting a strawman.

Eh, as a Seattleite, I'd say the the adverse affect will come in slow ripples. Some of the coffee shops I frequent have already posted signs telling customers that prices are being raised in response to the minimum wage hike. $4 for a cup of drip coffee, anyone?
 
What strawman?

Conservative columnists, talkers and pundits were saying the impending $15 minimum wage in Seattle was a factor in these restaurants closing.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/15/jobless-in-seattle/

Seattle became the pride of progressive politics when it passed its $15-an-hour entry-level wage, which is set to kick in April 1. According to the Washington Policy Center, it’s already having unintended consequences: namely, forcing restaurants to close.

http://www.aei.org/publication/seat...eading-to-restaurant-closings-and-job-losses/

Seattle’s new minimum wage law government-mandated wage floor that guarantees reduced employment opportunities for many workers goes into effect on April 1 and already the city has seen a number of restaurant closings and job losses related to the government-mandated wage hike.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...-effects-of-seattles-15-an-hour-minimum-wage/

However, we are seeing changes in the rather larger case of Seattle itself, as I predicted we would:

“Though none of our local departing/transitioning restaurateurs who announced their plans last month have elaborated on the issue, another major factor affecting restaurant futures in our city is the impending minimum wage hike to $15 per hour. Starting April 1, all businesses must begin to phase in the wage increase: Small employers have seven years to pay all employees at least $15 hourly; large employers (with 500 or more employees) have three.

Since the legislation was announced last summer, The Seattle Times and Eater have reported extensively on restaurant owners’ many concerns about how to compensate for the extra funds that will now be required for labor: They may need to raise menu prices, source poorer ingredients, reduce operating hours, reduce their labor and/or more.

Washington Restaurant Association’s Anton puts it this way: “It’s not a political problem; it’s a math problem.”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/03/16/quick_hits_page

RUSH: "Seattle, Washington: Why Are So Many Seattle Restaurants Closing Lately? -- Last month -- and particularly last week -- Seattle foodies," restaurant lovers, "were downcast as the blows kept coming: Queen Anne's Grub closed February 15. Pioneer Square's Little Uncle shut down February 25. Shanik's Meeru Dhalwala announced that it will close March 21. Renee Erickson's Boat Street Cafe will shutter May 30 after 17 years with her at the helm ...

"Furthermore, less than a week after he was named a James Beard Semifinalist (Best Chef: Northwest) for his work at northern Italian restaurant Spinasse, Jason Stratton announced he would be stepping down from that restaurant and his others -- Artusi and Vespolina -- immediately to head to Spain." These are high-class, white-tablecloth (in most cases), upscale restaurants, and they are closing in droves. Along with the normal reasons for closures... I mean, restaurant business is tough. Attrition is high in that business.

But these are successful restaurants that had been open for years in many cases, and they are shuttering. They are closing. They are going out of business. They're not even going to try it anymore. A "major factor affecting restaurant futures in our city is the impending minimum wage hike to $15 per hour. Starting April 1, all businesses must begin to phase in the wage increase: Small employers have seven years to pay all employees at least $15 hourly; large employers (with 500 or more employees) have three.

Well, the actual owners of those restaurants said that wasn't the case.

Not seeing the strawman I erected here.
 
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...e-restaurant-ragnarok-not-actually-happening/



They're not really closing becuase of the wage hike.

Sorry conservatives, but best of luck with the new arguments when you get them.

Uh, no one
Ever? Anywhere? in the entireity of the internet?
at all has ever doubted that it is possible to increase employment and the minimum wage at the same time. The impact of the general economy is usually going to be larger than the impact of the minimum wage. Furthermore, restaurants can stay open but make due with fewer employees. Restaurants in Washington state (which face the second highest minimum wage in the nation, second only to Washignton DC) average 14 employees per restaurant compared to the natural average of 17.

http://www.seattlemag.com/article/why-are-so-many-seattle-restaurants-closing-lately

You are refuting a strawman.

I put the words "minimum wage" in the search engine at the top of the late and generated a list of 138 threads.

If everyone every where is so broad minded and comprehensive in their thinking, what the fuck is everybody fighting about, over and over and over again?
 
What strawman?

Conservative columnists, talkers and pundits were saying the impending $15 minimum wage in Seattle was a factor in these restaurants closing.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/15/jobless-in-seattle/



http://www.aei.org/publication/seat...eading-to-restaurant-closings-and-job-losses/

Seattle’s new minimum wage law government-mandated wage floor that guarantees reduced employment opportunities for many workers goes into effect on April 1 and already the city has seen a number of restaurant closings and job losses related to the government-mandated wage hike.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...-effects-of-seattles-15-an-hour-minimum-wage/

However, we are seeing changes in the rather larger case of Seattle itself, as I predicted we would:

“Though none of our local departing/transitioning restaurateurs who announced their plans last month have elaborated on the issue, another major factor affecting restaurant futures in our city is the impending minimum wage hike to $15 per hour. Starting April 1, all businesses must begin to phase in the wage increase: Small employers have seven years to pay all employees at least $15 hourly; large employers (with 500 or more employees) have three.

Since the legislation was announced last summer, The Seattle Times and Eater have reported extensively on restaurant owners’ many concerns about how to compensate for the extra funds that will now be required for labor: They may need to raise menu prices, source poorer ingredients, reduce operating hours, reduce their labor and/or more.

Washington Restaurant Association’s Anton puts it this way: “It’s not a political problem; it’s a math problem.”

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/03/16/quick_hits_page

RUSH: "Seattle, Washington: Why Are So Many Seattle Restaurants Closing Lately? -- Last month -- and particularly last week -- Seattle foodies," restaurant lovers, "were downcast as the blows kept coming: Queen Anne's Grub closed February 15. Pioneer Square's Little Uncle shut down February 25. Shanik's Meeru Dhalwala announced that it will close March 21. Renee Erickson's Boat Street Cafe will shutter May 30 after 17 years with her at the helm ...

"Furthermore, less than a week after he was named a James Beard Semifinalist (Best Chef: Northwest) for his work at northern Italian restaurant Spinasse, Jason Stratton announced he would be stepping down from that restaurant and his others -- Artusi and Vespolina -- immediately to head to Spain." These are high-class, white-tablecloth (in most cases), upscale restaurants, and they are closing in droves. Along with the normal reasons for closures... I mean, restaurant business is tough. Attrition is high in that business.

But these are successful restaurants that had been open for years in many cases, and they are shuttering. They are closing. They are going out of business. They're not even going to try it anymore. A "major factor affecting restaurant futures in our city is the impending minimum wage hike to $15 per hour. Starting April 1, all businesses must begin to phase in the wage increase: Small employers have seven years to pay all employees at least $15 hourly; large employers (with 500 or more employees) have three.

Well, the actual owners of those restaurants said that wasn't the case.

Not seeing the strawman I erected here.

Ah, I see what you mean. I thought you were meaning what you posted was a refutation on the general impact of an increase in the minimum wage that is often claimed. I misread it.
 
Ah, I see what you mean. I thought you were meaning what you posted was a refutation on the general impact of an increase in the minimum wage that is often claimed. I misread it.

No worries.

We won't actually know the impact until it happens. I tend to think the impact will be mostly positive.

But the point of this thread was to point out that these particular writers/speakers were jumping the gun way too early and in fact were just completely wrong in their assumptions about why these restuarants were closing when in fact some of them were actually getting ready to expand.
 
Ah, I see what you mean. I thought you were meaning what you posted was a refutation on the general impact of an increase in the minimum wage that is often claimed. I misread it.

No worries.

We won't actually know the impact until it happens. I tend to think the impact will be mostly positive.

But the point of this thread was to point out that these particular writers/speakers were jumping the gun way too early and in fact were just completely wrong in their assumptions about why these restuarants were closing when in fact some of them were actually getting ready to expand.

There are a lot of conservative hacks out there. The ones with an ounce of integrity will post a correction.

I tend to like reading Mark Perry's blog every now and then - he does a good job in presenting data in an informative way and offers a unique perspective on that data. However, he is also quite a bit of a conservative hack and says some of the dumbest things at times and never seems to post any corrections when mistakes are pointed out.
 
Tim Worstall walks back his claim . . . kinda

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...tles-15-minimum-wage-and-restaurant-closures/

That is, they went and asked the owners of the restaurants that closed whether they had done so over the minimum wage and got the answer “No”. This isn’t, however, quite as much of a gotcha as one might think. Simply because the original article (as the Seattle Times itself points out) did not claim that these specific restaurants had closed as a result of the minimum wage. Rather, it used the fact that the restaurants were closing as a lead in to a discussion of the effects that a rise in the minimum wage would have.
 
Why would a minimum wage hike make it more likely a restaurant would stay open?

Ksen, werent you just arguing in another thread it's insane to argue these costs can be passed on?
 
Why would a minimum wage hike make it more likely a restaurant would stay open?

Who said that?

Ksen, werent you just arguing in another thread it's insane to argue these costs can be passed on?

Nope, unless you're misrepresenting my comment today about how it's ridiculous to argue that unit prices will rise in a 1:1 ratio with a MW hike.
 
Who said that?

Ksen, werent you just arguing in another thread it's insane to argue these costs can be passed on?

Nope, unless you're misrepresenting my comment today about how it's ridiculous to argue that unit prices will rise in a 1:1 ratio with a MW hike.

So they will not be able to pass on all the cost to customers then?

They will become less profitable?

If so, since restaurants do often shut due to lack of profitability, how would this not result in more of them?
 
Who said that?



Nope, unless you're misrepresenting my comment today about how it's ridiculous to argue that unit prices will rise in a 1:1 ratio with a MW hike.

So they will not be able to pass on all the cost to customers then?

Who said that? I know I didn't.

They will become less profitable?

Depends on if the increase for the demand of their products is more than the increase of their costs. Supply and demand. Econ 101.

If so, since restaurants do often shut due to lack of profitability, how would this not result in more of them?

I will pause here until you finally stop shifting the goalposts and creating strawmen.

Let me know when you're done.
 
So they will not be able to pass on all the cost to customers then?

Who said that? I know I didn't.

They will become less profitable?

Depends on if the increase for the demand of their products is more than the increase of their costs. Supply and demand. Econ 101.

If so, since restaurants do often shut due to lack of profitability, how would this not result in more of them?

I will pause here until you finally stop shifting the goalposts and creating strawmen.

Let me know when you're done.

You are here but you are bobbing and weaving so much it makes little difference.

Will restaurants be able to pass this cost on to customers or not?

Most of it, all of it, some of it, a little of it, none of it. Pick one.
 
Who said that? I know I didn't.

They will become less profitable?

Depends on if the increase for the demand of their products is more than the increase of their costs. Supply and demand. Econ 101.

If so, since restaurants do often shut due to lack of profitability, how would this not result in more of them?

I will pause here until you finally stop shifting the goalposts and creating strawmen.

Let me know when you're done.

You are here but you are bobbing and weaving so much it makes little difference.

Will restaurants be able to pass this cost on to customers or not?

Most of it, all of it, some of it, a little of it, none of it. Pick one.

This a month and a half later and I guess he never did pick one.
 
It may be one of the first casualties of Seattle’s new minimum wage law. The owner of Z Pizza says she’s being forced to close her doors, because she can’t afford the higher labor costs.

http://q13fox.com/2015/04/28/owner-of-pizza-shop-says-new-minimum-wage-law-is-forcing-her-to-close/

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2015/04/a-pizza-place-closes-in-seattle/

Screen-Shot-2015-04-09-at-7.06.00-PM.png


:shrug:
 
Who said that? I know I didn't.

They will become less profitable?

Depends on if the increase for the demand of their products is more than the increase of their costs. Supply and demand. Econ 101.

If so, since restaurants do often shut due to lack of profitability, how would this not result in more of them?

I will pause here until you finally stop shifting the goalposts and creating strawmen.

Let me know when you're done.

You are here but you are bobbing and weaving so much it makes little difference.

If by "bobbing and weaving" you mean not letting you get away with shifting goalposts and creating strawmen without comment you're right.

Will restaurants be able to pass this cost on to customers or not?

Most of it, all of it, some of it, a little of it, none of it. Pick one.

Maybe you aren't aware but restaurants are not a monolithic entity where there's only one answer that's applicable to all of them.

There is no "one" answer. Some restaurants will be able to pass on most of it, some all of it, some some of it, some a little of it and some none of it.

I'm sorry that messy reality doesn't fit into your neat little boxes.
 
Perhaps Z Pizza could have cut their franchise fees.

Oh wait that's crazy talk. The corporations are always right.
 
Apparently in Seattle another big problem for small business is skyrocketing rents. Yet we don't hear about that I guess because owners of capital should get what their property is worth but owners of labor should just be happy with what they're given.
 
Back
Top Bottom