California Senate passes $13 minimum wage bill
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 08:10:58 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  California Senate passes $13 minimum wage bill
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: California Senate passes $13 minimum wage bill  (Read 3298 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,751


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2014, 08:44:57 PM »

This doesn't seem to be getting much attention. Perhaps it's expected to fail. It seems there's a lot of activity at the local level for minimum wages in California, but none of them are over $13 an hour.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 17, 2014, 09:11:09 PM »

Because of increases in the minimum wage? Huh

Bizarre.....

At no point during this thread did I use minimum wage to explain increases in aggregate price level or aggregate consumption.

I said min wage could cause reduced consumption in the effected industries, which could ultimately reduce labor demand in the same industries. You inferred that I was talking about aggregate price level, which you attempted to rebut by citing lack of aggregate price level increases. Aggregate price level is utterly irrelevant, hence the existence of more specific price-indices. How you could confuse these unrelated discussions is beyond me.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 17, 2014, 09:28:23 PM »

A higher minimum wage raises peoples' incomes at a greater rate than it'd increase prices in affected industries.
Logged
politicallefty
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,247
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -9.22

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 18, 2014, 05:56:58 AM »

This doesn't seem to be getting much attention. Perhaps it's expected to fail. It seems there's a lot of activity at the local level for minimum wages in California, but none of them are over $13 an hour.

The lack of coverage does seem to be cause for some concern, but we'll see. I think San Francisco will be voting on $15 this November and there's a proposal to put $13.09 on the ballot in San Diego.
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: June 18, 2014, 09:21:31 AM »

Because of increases in the minimum wage? Huh

Bizarre.....

At no point during this thread did I use minimum wage to explain increases in aggregate price level or aggregate consumption.

I said min wage could cause reduced consumption in the effected industries, which could ultimately reduce labor demand in the same industries. You inferred that I was talking about aggregate price level, which you attempted to rebut by citing lack of aggregate price level increases. Aggregate price level is utterly irrelevant, hence the existence of more specific price-indices. How you could confuse these unrelated discussions is beyond me.

You are the one that brought up the red herring of increased property costs in CA, not me. I only "confuse these unrelated discussions" when you start unrelated discussions.
Logged
AggregateDemand
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,873
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2014, 04:51:49 PM »
« Edited: June 18, 2014, 06:38:42 PM by AggregateDemand »

A higher minimum wage raises peoples' incomes at a greater rate than it'd increase prices in affected industries.

You're establishing a wage floor. Income will rise for most workers. Some will lose their jobs, increasing the strain on the public welfare/unemployment entitlements. You're proliferating the current perverse system that pays people not to work, rather than paying them a subsidy to continue producing.

The entitlement paradigm is given a blanket endorsement under the false pretense that increasing wages will create greater aggregate demand in the economy, which will lead to hiring in other industries. It hasn't happened since the Oil Crisis and the rise of Japan. Instead, jobs are outsourced, and middle class income leaves the country as import spending rises.

How many more decades will this continue before the left-wing Keynesian rabble-rousers come to their senses?

Cost of labor to producers must go down. The Bush administration used deficit spending to put downward pressure on the dollar and export our price inflation to countries who buy dollars. Our ability to continue that arrangement has been severely impaired by the Great Recession. What do you want to do now? Suck harder on the Great Soceity status quo?
Logged
badgate
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,466


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2014, 05:57:19 PM »

Brown will veto if it makes past the House.

That's surprising news. Link?

I think it's mostly just speculation so far.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2014/06/02/success-of-minimum-wage-hike-far-from-assured.html?page=all

Though the article does give one decent reason, which is that he signed a minimum wage hike last fall. It has not even gone into effect yet.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.22 seconds with 11 queries.