Beware the Ides of March -- U.S. Politics March 2021

I mean YES, of course, this is completely a false scarcity argument because if we had M4A/socialized medicine and a better support system then everyone's costs potentially go down and there is relief in other places.

Socialized risk, privatized profit, yes.

If the state is already going to be paying the wages, why not just open up state-owned grocery stores? Why line the pockets of someone already well-off enough to own a grocery store?

that was an xp

If the point is to double the minimum wage of the worker, what could possibly be the problem?

we have asked the workers. they say that subsidizing the petite bourgeoisie in any way is too big a sacrifice, even if it doubles their wages.

If the state is already going to be paying the wages, why not just open up state-owned grocery stores? Why line the pockets of someone already well-off enough to own a grocery store?

― Joe Bombin (milo z), Friday, March 5, 2021 6:52 PM (0 seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

You realize private profit is taxable? Both are viable solutions. Liquor in Quebec is only sold in government mandated stores and workers are paid higher than minimum wage. There is also wage help for certains industry at risk, works very well. The smart thing would be to use the entire array of solutions that government can offer to help citizens and buffer against the worse of the market.

You realize private profit is taxable?

It's never taxable 100% - so the risk remains social and the profit private.

Both are viable solutions

You only suggested one, though - and then said it should be uncontroversial for "leftist."

I don't know about you, but I don't see many risks associated with giving a minimum wage of 15$ to workers.

You've bumbled in here offering up a convoluted fantasy to protect the dignity (and profit) of these many supposedly struggling small businesses that you're very non-specific about, because a four-year phase-in wasn't enough "relief to cushion" for a wage floor that has been frozen for more than a decade and losing value for multiple decades, because you once worked for a small business that had to move.

many risks associated with giving a minimum wage of 15$ to workers.

You cannot be this stupid.

VHS, in your view are there any other costs of doing business that should be addressed by subsidy, rather than accounted for in the spreadsheets of the business owner? Like, if an owner claims "the rising electric bill will put me out of business," or "bringing this kitchen up to code will put me out of business," or "the rising rent will put me out of business," is the government on the hook for those things too, or is it only the cost of labor that goes in this category?

I mention rent since in your example above that was a real factor in a business decision, and something we know shutters businesses all the time. Whereas, as others have pointed out, there is not exactly robust evidence that raising the minimum wage spells doom for the entrepreneur.

So, and I ask this seriously, if President Sanders or Warren had gotten the nomination, beaten Trump, and reached this impasse, would we have been in a different situation? I don't envisage a scenario in which my preferred candidates would've converted a recalcitrant Sinema or Manchin withou pork.

good thing that earmarks will be making a comeback

we're talking theory here, Alfred, not sausage-making

You've bumbled in here offering up a convoluted fantasy to protect the dignity (and profit) of these many supposedly struggling small businesses that you're very non-specific about, because a four-year phase-in wasn't enough "relief to cushion" for a wage floor that has been frozen for more than a decade and losing value for multiple decades, because you once worked for a small business that had to move.

many risks associated with giving a minimum wage of 15$ to workers.
You cannot be this stupid.
― Joe Bombin (milo z), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:05 PM (four minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I am going to need an explanation how the government subsidizing wages is going to help the profits of a business.

Warren or Bernie’s VP would have overridden the parliamentarian, for a start. Putting the recalcitrant Senators on the record on the hook to vote down a bill with 80% support.

xp

.............They...don't have to pay their employees??? so they get to keep more of the gross in the net??

Am I losing my mind?

We’ll never know if that strategy would work, but this one certainly doesn’t seem to be working.

Truly I'm not that good with accounting stuff so forgive me if I'm not understanding the question but

I mention rent since in your example above that was a real factor in a business decision, and something we know shutters businesses all the time. Whereas, as others have pointed out, there is not exactly robust evidence that raising the minimum wage spells doom for the entrepreneur.

― honkin' on bobo, honkin' with my feet ten feet off of beale (Doctor Casino), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:05 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Tighter control of SME's rents is absolutely necessary, and to me a solution would be closer to a freeze. I don't see how subsiding rent really help the bottom line of workers.

Truly I'm not that good with accounting stuff so forgive me if I'm not understanding the question but

― Ima Gardener (in orbit), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:13 PM (thirteen seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

Worker is still paid 7.5$ dollar by business, govt pays the balance to 15$ that goes directly in the pocket of the worker.

I am going to need an explanation how the government subsidizing wages is going to help the profits of a business.

Well if I, downtrodden grocery store proprietor, don't have to pay half my labor costs that's extra profit for me. Or extra capital to open up another struggling grocery store... which is also extra profit for me.

Which would, yes, be taxed - if I have a terrible accountant who can't get me out of as much as possible, and would be taxed at a lower rate than actual workers since my S-corp dividend wouldn't have to pay FICA.

Worker is still paid 7.5$ dollar by business, govt pays the balance to 15$ that goes directly in the pocket of the worker.

You're now requiring workers to work to earn profits for the grocery store in order to receive a $7.50 per hour welfare benefit.

Yeah! How is it so mysterious that the subsidization adds overall capacity to the business?? The employer can retain more employees on staff bc is paying less of their salary, so they can do more units of "business" with more people to do the labor.

why would i want my tax money to pay for labor that someone is making a profit from (which we already do in many ways when full time workers are poor enough to qualify for public benefits, for example)? does the government get equity in the business?

You're now requiring workers to work to earn profits for the grocery store in order to receive a $7.50 per hour welfare benefit.

― Joe Bombin (milo z), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:18 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

Well if it's that or further unemployment, which are you going to chose?

Seems like it would just be easier to phase in a $15 minimum wage and give small businesses a few years to catch up. It's incredibly shitty and imperfect (as $15 itself is insufficient) since the wage floor has been frozen for most of my adult life but I hear compromise is important or something like that.

Well if it's that or further unemployment, which are you going to chose?

I'm going to choose to pay people to stay home and read to their kids instead of stocking shelves for a guy with three houses.

Well if it's that or further unemployment, which are you going to chose?

― Van Horn Street, Friday, March 5, 2021 7:21 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

this is not what the choices are????

You've bumbled in here offering up a convoluted fantasy to protect the dignity (and profit) of these many supposedly struggling small businesses that you're very non-specific about, because a four-year phase-in wasn't enough "relief to cushion" for a wage floor that has been frozen for more than a decade and losing value for multiple decades, because you once worked for a small business that had to move.

many risks associated with giving a minimum wage of 15$ to workers.
You cannot be this stupid.

― Joe Bombin (milo z), Saturday, 6 March 2021 00:05 (seventeen minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Bookmarking this one the next time some bullshit artist comes all wide-eyed about poor downtrodden milo just making good firm arguments in the spirit of political cut n thrust

milo’s otm rn tho

this is not what the choices are????

― superdeep borehole (harbl), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:23 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

I am proposing this for struggling SMEs only. It was to answer the question: what do to if a small business is financially threatened by a wage increase? Which is a possibility, and this has been a proven method that can help both workers and small businesses.

No small businesses are actually threatened by minimum wage increases. This FUD was spread widely here years ago when $15/hr was passed, shockingly demand for entry-level labor only went up.

Anyway fuck small business owners.

Anyway fuck small business owners.

― Canon in Deez (silby), Friday, March 5, 2021 7:28 PM (forty-four seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

how rebellious

?

Won't you think of the businesses that had to move to a suburb instead of the city? They have feelings too.

I said they had to close, the people don't own the business anymore, it created unemployment, including theirs, and a great amount of debt, which is fantastic I suppose because 'fuck small business owners'.

You're hatred of all things not of your specific tribe is so terribly sad.

*your

Yes, sorry.

Little bit of news in here: Last weekend, some centrist Senate Dems circulated a plan to amend the $1,400 stimulus payment so families would only receive $400 per child, per 3 sources. The plan ran into stiff opposition & was abandoned. W/ @TonyRomm https://t.co/MV8QRbMyG5

— Jeff Stein (@JStein_WaPo) March 6, 2021

https://f4.bcbits.com/img/a1169399198_10.jpg

Don’t apologize when I troll you for your typos! Cmon stand up for yourself

VHS it seems like you are really taking this one example to heart and this anecdote is not a basis for policy, you have to understand that surely?

if we have rent controls for small business, won't the landlords have to close their small businesses

I also worked for a year on a wage subsidy for a struggling film co-op and it kickstarted my career. It's mostly that I am talking from somewhere where such subsidy exists and work and have had great benefits.

I don't know why we're stopping at covering 50% of their wages when we could do 100%?

struggling film co-op

Co-op is a business. With owners.

and in this case, the owners were not the workers.

VHS I was not proposing subsidizing commercial rents as a method of helping workers' wages, I was pointing out a cost that, in your account, ACTUALLY closed the business you described, and one which nobody including you is proposing we subsidize. So I'm still scratching my head why, seemingly alone out of all forms of overhead/expenses/costs, labor is the one that needs to be massively (massively!) subsidized, on the vague say-so of owners who speculate (without any evidence, certainly none that's been shared to this thread) that a higher minimum wage will lead to them closing rather than leading to them postponing their planned jacuzzi purchase at the lake house.

milo's aggro stridency here is imo not really helpful and i don't advocate it as a posting strategy, but argument-wise he is otm on this one.

we have asked the workers. they say that subsidizing the petite bourgeoisie in any way is too big a sacrifice, even if it doubles their wages.

― Judge Roi Behan (Aimless), Friday, March 5, 2021 3:54 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

You know this is unfair, Aimless.

The problem is that the bugbear of "small business owners" is not some sort of downtrodden class— they are, for the most part, people who were born, raised, and continue to be middle-class to upper-middle class. Much of how this subject is treated depends upon an irresponsible and reckless view of the class dynamics of US society, which views "small business owners" as some sort of bloc of people who began small businesses on just a dream and a prayer, when there was really *a not insignificant amount of money* behind them, otherwise they wouldn't have been able to start businesses.

So when these small business owners claim that minimum wage increases would "kill their business," what they're actually saying is, "I got mine and I deserve it, fuck the people who allow me to claim the status that I have."

Aggro because I don't think VHS is acting in good faith - when he starts with something like 'it's a fallacy to say small businesses and Fortune 500 companies should be treated the same' (and starts formulating after several posts that that means small businesses should get direct subsidies) and pretending to not understand what 'socializing risk' means, I have my doubts about sincerity.