Obama to raise federal minimum wage via executive order

I put it in quotations b/c when you refer to the "data", you're not actually referring to the data itself. You're referring to your misinterpretation of the data.

 

CometsWin, it's a yes/no question. I've given you GladiatoRowdy's interpretation of the data. Do you agree with it? Yes or no?

 

It depends on what kind of business they do. If they make inelastic goods they won't have to worry about it, they'll just pass the additional cost on to the customer plus a little extra. If their business deals with elastic goods then they'll either have to find a way to cut costs or shut down, that usually means either laying people off and replacing them with automation (or not at all) or outsourcing the entire job.

You bring up the capital investment issue, well there are products that people simply won't pay significantly more for so they can't raise prices all that much, in those situations their choices are either to sink the money to keep their company viable, shipping the company to another country, or shutting down entirely. Choosing to invest isn't the worst thing.

The big issue with raising the minimum wage is that it doesn't actually help people. At the end of the day they still have the least amount of buying power in the market which makes them poor. All it does is raises the poverty level. History has proven this, people are just as poor (or more so) making 7.50 or whatever the wage is at now as they were making 4.25 20 years ago, they are every bit as poor as people making 2 bucks an hour 40 years ago.

As long as the institutional reasons for their poverty remain the same, people on minimum wage will be poor. You could make 40k a year poverty if you wanted to raise the minimum enough.

 

Let's see.

In 1901, the biggest domestic auto manufacturer was Locomobile, which produced 1500 steam-powered cars , about half of the 3000 cars built in the entire US.

By 1921, the leading auto manufacturer was Ford Motor Co, producing 1.2 million cars a year.

but yeah not as disruptive as LCD touch screens because retina displays!

 

Incorrect. It's a different market. The internet opened up the world.

What do you consider a "moderate" amount? In 2009, we saw a 10.7% increase. In 2008, a 12% increase. In 2007, a 13.6% increase.

Obama's proposal of $10.10 would constitute almost a 40% increase.

Incorrect. Self-service kiosks replace human labor. Look at the self-checkout registers in grocery stores. One clerk monitors 4 self-checkout registers. 20 years ago, that would've taken at least 4 cashiers (for express lanes) and at most 4 cashiers plus 4 sackers (for regular lanes).

The minimum wage is $7.25 and self-checkout registers & self-service kiosks already exist. I really don't know why you refuse to accept these as "evidence".

 

No, I'm referring to the data.

 

You mean the rest of the world didn't have markets until the internet? Really? They couldn't mail order or phone order when those were the dominant technologies?

You believe an awful lot of truly inaccurate things.

IIRC, Obama's proposal is broken up over 3 years, just like the 2007-9 increase, which amounted to an overall 40.7% increase ($2.10/$5.15), compared to an overall increase of 40% proposed by Obama. So, we're talking about a SMALLER increase than the last go-round, but don't let the facts get in the way of your inaccurate beliefs.

In practice, you know, the real world, self service kiosks supplement human labor. Humans still do the labor (I self scan nearly every time I go to the grocery store) and employees are still there, but we see shorter lines in the grocery store with the same number of checkers they have always had (do you have data which shows grocery checkers lost their jobs as self serve kiosks started being introduced? Thought not.), I haven't noticed dramatically less checkers these days than 10 years ago, there are just more "express" lanes.

Because there isn't any evidence (you know, data like I have provided) that those kiosks have REPLACED human workers as opposed to simply decreasing line lengths and waits for customers.

Companies typically automate to eliminate human error, increase efficiencies, and to improve customer service. Some of this automation (particularly in manufacturing, where worker's wages were FAR above minimum wage) did replace one class of worker with another class of worker, but there is no evidence that I am aware of which shows that minimum wage workers will be replaced en masse by automated options if the minimum wage steps up.

Your speculation doesn't count as "evidence."

 

It certainly is better than your speculation combined with an utter lack of data.

 

When drawing their conclusion, the researchers noted the parameters and limitations of their data. You then took their conclusion, ignored the parameters/limitation, and applied it wherever you wanted.

So no, you're not referring to the data. You're referring to your misinterpretation of it.

 

Do you seriously think that the speed and availability of global commerce 20 years ago was anything like it is today?

Do you have a link to this proposal? Everything I've read indicates that Obama wants a direct jump from $7.25 to $10.10.

When you self-scan at a self-checkout register, it doesn't cost the grocery store anything. If a cashier were to check your groceries, it would cost the grocery store $7.25/hour.

Then based on your experience, there must be fewer sackers.

I worked at a grocery store when I was in high school. Right now, there are definitely fewer cashiers working. Look at it this way. Before self-checkout registers, grocery stores would need to have at least 3 cashiers + 3 sackers during the non-peak day hours in case of a surge in customers.

Now, those same hours can be handled by 1 cashier, 1 sacker, and 1 person operating the self-checkout registers.

Do you know what else decreases line lengths and waits for customers? More cashiers and sackers. By virtue of having these kiosks and self-checkout registers, those extra cashiers and sackers aren't necessary. They've been REPLACED.

 

LOL - no just the hundreds or thousands of dollars it costs to lease each machine per month, maintenence and the $7.25 (it's probably actually more) an hour they have to pay the attendant who monitors the machine bank.

Other than that there's basically no incremental cost.

Uh, no. Sackers just don't exist as much anymore regardless of how many checkout machines are automated. You're exaggerating and making up fake data, again.

 

Obama to raise unemployment rate by executive order.

Fixed.

 

No, I am referring to the data. I'm sorry the data doesn't agree with your ideological opinions, but in the absence of data which contradicts it, it is still the most relevant data which exists.

 

Speed doesn't create or destroy markets, it merely changes them. There is no doubt that technology has dramatically changed markets over the last 20 years, but those markets existed LONG before the internet.

I was able to Google it in 10 seconds, are you afraid of Google? In fact, this proposal was to go to $9 per hour, in steps through 2015. It isn't dated, so I'm assuming it was a prior proposal, but I would assume that the new proposal is similar in that it steps up the minimum wage, then indexes it to inflation.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/sotu_minimum_wage.pdf

It cost them the price of the self checkout infrastructure along with at least $7.25 per hour for the checker that mans the self-checkout lanes. However, as I noted, I don't notice dramatically fewer workers at the grocery store than worked there 20 years ago.

I haven't been in a grocery store where there were fewer than 2 checkout/sacker combinations, and most of the time, I see at least thee, plus the self checkout person. I think you are making an awful lot of assumptions without actual data, which is SOP for you.

No, they haven't. I'm sorry that you have the ability to believe things when there just isn't any evidence, but that is exactly what you are doing. You have made an assumption (minimum wage increases will cause companies to automate people out of jobs), and believe it so completely that you will create any number of scenarios in your mind to justify your belief, EVEN WHEN THE RELEVANT DATA WE HAVE POINTS TO THE OPPOSITE CONCLUSION.

It is truly sad that you will ignore the evidence, but that is exactly what you are doing.

 

Did I say that those markets didn't exist before the internet? Or did I say that, due to advances in technology, the speed and availability of global commerce today is significantly better than it was 20 years ago?

Just so I'm clear...

1. I said that Obama's proposed minimum wage increase to $10.10 would represent a ~40% increase, much higher than anything in recent history.

2. You claim that Obama's minimum wage increase proposal will be implemented over the course of 3 years. You also advise me to not let facts get in the way of my inaccurate beliefs.

3. I ask you for a link to the proposal.

4. You, after asking me if I'm afraid to use Google, provide an undated proposal from the White House (increasing minimum wage to $9 and then indexing it to inflation) and think you've proved your point.

Once again, you're using outdated and irrelevant data to support your argument. The $9 proposal to which you're referring came out in February 2013.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/u...e-in-federal-minimum-wage.html?pagewanted=all

If you're going to include the costs of the self-checkout infrastructure, you can't ignore the costs of the regular registers. Regardless, a if grocery store wants to have at least 4 lanes open at all times, it's significantly cheaper to get 4 self-checkout registers plus an operator instead of having a cashier and sacker at each of the 4 lanes.

1. You said that self-checkout kiosks haven't REPLACED human workers. Instead, they've merely decreased line lengths and waits for customers.

2. I then pointed out that decreasing line lengths and waits for customers could also be achieved by having more workers. But instead of utilizing more workers, the grocery store has utilized self-checkout registers. In other words, the workers have been replaced by self-checkout registers.

3. You say I'm wrong without offering any additional counterargument.

At this point in the tangent, it's pretty clear you're wrong.

It's truly sad that you think technology-sensitive data collected 20 years ago is still applicable today.

 

You're repeating the same tautology day after day, week after week, either in an attempt to provoke a response, or maybe because you really are a human GOTO statement.

"GUYS TECHNOLOGY IS MORE ADVANCED NOW THAN EVER!!!"

This statement is a self-fulfilling, un-nuanced throwaway line; it isn't particularly salient or relevant to the evidence that others are citing which are using relativistic, contextual data that undercuts what you say, which as far as I can determine, is that you're not opposed to minimum wage increase but GUYS TECHNOLOGY!

So I go back to the question of what you want in recognition of your achievement of discerning this groundbreaking point?

Rep points? A commemorative placard, perhaps fashioned by the Franklin Mint? A planeload of rubber dogsh-t out of Hong Kong?

or perhaps the opportunity to whine about how you're being insulted and how rude all the big BBS meanies are?

do tell, or preferably don't.

 

Is this a sarcastic post? I'm confused.

 

The cited data comes from 20 years ago and is sensitive to technology. Do you think the advancement of technology over the past 20 years should factor into whether or not the data is relevant today?

It's a yes/no question. Try to limit your answer to either "yes" or "no".

 

Yaaa, I'm going to go ahead and say "Objection to Form" - with 100% confidence that my objection would be sustained unde rhte FRE/FRCP/common law as we know it, since you're going all "evidence!" on me.


If you want to frame a question then you have to be a lot more contextual - you can't ask an open-ended, utterly incomplete question with undefined variables and then say YES OR NO!

We can't read what is going on your little brain, you have a communication issue going on here. Can you get your "think words" onto "screen words"? Perhaps you can figure this out and re-phrase the question, or maybe technology will do it for you.

I await your response.

 

Speed and availability don't make it a radically different market, just a faster one.

You need to learn to read. I specifically stated that the proposal that I found wasn't dated and was likely an old one (though only one year out of date), but that the new one likely had the same incremental approach to raising the minimum wage. Perhaps you should link to whatever source you have which is making you assume that Obama was a one-step jump to $10.10.

But there isn't any data which show that these self checkout lanes supplanted workers as opposed to simply augmenting the existing workforce. My perception is that there are as many checkers as there used to be, but as a result of one of them being able to manage 4 (or, in the case of my grocery store, 6) stations, there are shorter lines.

I didn't say you were wrong, but your perception of how many checkers there are on staff seems to be drastically different from mine. My perception is that the self checkout lanes augmented the stores' ability to maintain shorter lines rather than supplanting the workers. You haven't shown any data which might prove my perception inaccurate in this example, so I will continue to believe my perception.

At this point in the tangent, it's pretty clear that you make an awful lot of assumptions even in the absence of data to support those assumptions.

It's truly sad that you will simply dismiss the best, most applicable data we have on this subject due to the assumptions you have made and the justifications you have dreamed up. Assumptions and dreams seem to be all you have to stand on.