- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 39,178
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Your ideological adherence to illogical economic theories does not make you an expert on what I do, don't or can't know. We already had this argument back in the Adding rights thread. I asked you a question there. You declined to answer it, but the question didn't go away. For your convenience, here it is again:
Do you think each worker making $10/hour is generating at least $15/hour in extra revenue?
I do not know what you do. I know the CBO has estimated job losses should a fifteen dollar an hour minimum be set. But this is an estimate. And yes I will admit I have an ideological adherence to people making a living wage. That no one should live off of starvation wages and social services. Should the CBO estimates pan out, then we will deal with it if it needs dealing with. Is McDonald's going to cut it's workforce if they have to pay their employees $15 an hour? As if they have an overabundance of employees now. As if employees are so under-worked now they can double up on tasks. As if McDonald's is going to say, that's it, no more Egg McMuffins. We just can't afford to make them any longer. No. They are going to let it eat into profits (absorb cost) and/or raise prices. They will absorb costs as much as possible. They always do. Just like Whirlpool is absorbing the high cost of rolled steel today. Just like auto manufacturers should have to absorb the cost of their chip shortage or at least have maintained an inventory. So much for lean manufacturing. But they won't. They whined and we will provide a social service to them by picking up the cost without demanding any change to prevent this from happening again.
I do not understand the point of your previously ignored question other than to steer the conversation. If a business cannot survive while paying it's employees a living wage then it does not deserve to. Perhaps the goods or service they provided were not necessary or desirable enough for the consumer to pay an increased price. But I think having to absorb the cost is what is at the root of the argument against a living wage. Just a guess.
My wifes workplace did bang up business during the period of the stimulus. It almost seems like having customers with money to spend is good for business.