(cache) bluefootedpigがBeloved San Francisco sci-fi bookstore becomes casualty of minimum wage hike passed by voters: "You know, I voted for the measure as well, the minimum wage measure," customer Edward Vallecillo said. "It's not something that I thought would affect certain specific small businesses. I feel sad."について記入したコメント

Name	Description	Date/Time	link
David Friedman	Economist, physicist, legal scholar, and libertarian theorist. Son of Milton Friedman and author of Machinery of Freedom, now in Third Edition.	Jan.28 @ 2pm EST	here

129

130

131

Beloved San Francisco sci-fi bookstore becomes casualty of minimum wage hike passed by voters: "You know, I voted for the measure as well, the minimum wage measure," customer Edward Vallecillo said. "It's not something that I thought would affect certain specific small businesses. I feel sad." (abc7news.com)

chabanaisFortis est veritas が 14 時間前投稿

あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]FarsideSC 23 ポイント24 ポイント25 ポイント 14 時間前 (65子コメント)

固定リンク

[–]bluefootedpig -23 ポイント-22 ポイント-21 ポイント 14 時間前 (64子コメント)

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] 24 ポイント25 ポイント26 ポイント 14 時間前 (32子コメント)

[+]bluefootedpig スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 12 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 12 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 11 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]beaker38 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 11 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 10 時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]bluefootedpig スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 12 時間前 (24子コメント)

I would think you, of all people, would understand supply and demand. In SF, we have a high demand for high paying jobs. We have companies struggling to get into SF to get talent that they want. In a market based on supply and demand, wages are merely representation of the demand for higher wages in the area.

Currently there is a shortage in supply of high tech jobs in SF. We have much more demand, hence wages are going up for tech field here.

If a company cannot keep up with the cost of doing business, and there are others that are willing to move in, then any good business would drop the bad and pick up the good.

Imagine you own a business, and you sell chips. Only, no one is buying the chips you are selling. Everyone is saying they want this other brand of chips and refuses to buy the chips. Would you stop carrying the brand that doesn't sell and pick up the one that does?

According to what you are saying, a good business would ignore that there is a huge market for a different product, because if you stopped selling the chips that don't really sell, well that company would lose employees.

So tell me honestly, if you had 2 products, one that is in high demand, and one in low demand, which would you sell? Then answer me if you have a business that employs 30 people at a high wage vs a company that hires 12 at a low wage, which would you pick to have in your city?

[–]ActionAxiomkierkegaardian 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 12 時間前 (21子コメント)

[–]VStarffin -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 11 時間前 (16子コメント)

[–]LowReadyIndividual Sovereignty 5 ポイント6 ポイント7 ポイント 9 時間前 (7子コメント)

[–]VStarffin -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 9 時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]LowReadyIndividual Sovereignty 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 9 時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]VStarffin 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 9 時間前 (4子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]Diesel-66 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 9 時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]VStarffin -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 9 時間前 (5子コメント)

[–]Diesel-66 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 9 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]VStarffin 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 8 時間前 (3子コメント)

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]ActionAxiomkierkegaardian 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 9 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 11 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]ActionAxiomkierkegaardian 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 9 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]yes02 -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 9 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 8 時間前 (0子コメント)

There are limited numbers of places a business can open up in SF, only X sq ft total. There are people waiting to get into the city and start their business, paying very high wages.

By codifying the price, the local population of SF is saying that you must pay people X to run a business here, if you can't, then you aren't welcome.

People are demanding higher wage jobs and are in a sense rejecting low wage jobs in the city.

The reason that people are also raising the min wage, besides helping those at min wage, is that businesses that fail to provide a livable wage are priced out.

The demand for better jobs can be achieved through things such as place floors. There is obviously enough demand by workers, because they voted for the raise. Only a small portion of people are paid min wage, yet all the big earners in SF still said, "yes, pay them more". They are able to say this, because there is such a high demand.

Imagine a city with no businesses wanting to go there. They can't really demand a higher wage, because no one wants to even be there. They need low wages to attract businesses. But in SF, min wage can be 15/hr and there are still companies wanting to open up in SF.

So because there are many companies wanting to open up in SF (Demand for space), the price of labor can go up (enacted via group negotiation through the state). If the demand wasn't there, then raising the min wage would kill off businesses and no one would replace them. But they are replaced, by better paying jobs, BECAUSE we have such demand.

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 12 時間前 (1子コメント)

Raising the minimum wage is not done for "high tech jobs" in SF. If you work for Google you really don't care if the minimum wage is $5 or $10 in the sense that if won't affect you.

Last time I checked, not everybody is able or qualified to work in a high tech job. If the State is punishing the non-high tech industry and artificially making it unaffordable for any other types of businesses to exist it won't be long until that city is fucked and those policies wil simply make things worse for the residents of that city.

If that bookstore was renting his space, when his lease came due his landlord - if allowed - could raise his rent and he'd leave anyway.

I think it's pretty sad you're in favor of the Government using its powers to dictate what types of businesses should exist so it can reap more tax revenue.

[–]bluefootedpig -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 11 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]FarsideSC -4 ポイント-3 ポイント-2 ポイント 14 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]LRonPaul2012 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 1 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Drekken- -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 13 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]Trizlo -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 7 時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]Warnings スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント-4 ポイント 13 時間前 (27子コメント)

[–]CrossCheckPandaIndependently Libertarianish 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 12 時間前 (5子コメント)

If you stop fucking with the free market it comes to a safe equilibrium on its own. Let's start with the current state of SF:

1.) Cost of loving is too high and unskilled wages are too low for unskilled laborer to make a reasonable living.

2.) To avoid low quality of life some unskilled laborers move to other parts of the country where a more comfortable living can be made on unskilled labor.

3.) Decreasing population density lowers demand for housing and other expenses giving a lower cost of living. Simultaneously, decreased supply of unskilled labor increases unskilled wages due to a near constant demand for unskilled labor with a decreasing supply.

4.) An equilibrium is reached where there are fewer unskilled laborers in the city but the wages are higher due to competition and cost of loving is lower due to decreased housing demand.

But instead of letting this happen the local government keeps interfering with the invisible hand propping up those who have a job with minimum wages - which is actually counter productive because it lowers supply of jobs but strings people along with the hopes of a high minimum wage job. While temporary relief is there for those with jobs, The supply of unskilled jobs becomes even father from the demand . This makes employees even more expendable than before decreasing the value of the unskilled worker - and garunteeing an issue in the near future.

[–]bluefootedpig 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 11 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]CrossCheckPandaIndependently Libertarianish 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 11 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 10 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]CrossCheckPandaIndependently Libertarianish 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 10 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]unicornsaretuff 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 3 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]shiner_man 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 13 時間前 (4子コメント)

I'm just going to copy and paste my response from another thread since you're basically making the cliche argument that 'the business doesn't deserve to stay open'.

I'm really glad you posted this comment. I read retorts like this all the time on /r/politics when someone dares to point out that frivolous government legislation can and has caused businesses to go bankrupt. Allow me to explain.

First and foremost, it's comments like these that really illustrate the fascist nature of today's "liberals" (read: Statist). The voluntary agreement between two parties - which is the case here - is something liberals can't bare to sit back and watch without opining. Only liberals know what is and what is not a "fair" agreement between two parties. It is they and only they who know what is best for the rest of us.

This is all well and good. Voicing one's opinions should be encouraged. The problem is that liberals can't simply stop there. They simply must appeal to the State to intervene in these so called unfair situations. They believe it is the State's responsibility to legislate their morality on the rest of us (after all, only they know what is best for everyone).

Secondly, it seems as though liberals always love to claim that situations like these are "market" forces at work. Which begs the question, do liberals even know what free market means? Let me give a quick example:

Person A: "I would like you to dig a hole for me. I will pay you $20 to do it."

Person B: "Okay. You've got a deal."

That's an example of a free market for people who understand what the term means.

Now here's a liberal's example of the free market:

Person A: "I would like you to dig a hole for me. I will pay you $20 to do it."

Person B: "Okay. You've got a deal."

Person C: "I don't think this deal is fair. You're both being fined $40 and I'm shutting down your hole digging business."

[–]VStarffin 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 12 時間前 (2子コメント)

They believe it is the State's responsibility to legislate their morality on the rest of us (after all, only they know what is best for everyone).

How are you doing anything different?

What we have in reality is a situation where a worker wants more money, but doesn't have the bargaining power to get it. So they go to the government and ask the government to help by setting a floor on wages.

Liberals say "ok" Conservatives and libertarians say "no"

We're both answering the demand in our own way, imposing our own morality on the situation. What's the difference?

Now here's a liberal's example of the free market:

But of course, that's not what's happening. People support minimum wage laws, and pass them by referenda. What's the conversation is like is more like this:

Person A: "I would like you to dig a hole for me. I will pay you $20 to do it."

Person B: "$20 seems low. How about $30?"

Person A: "No, you'll take $20 and like it, because you have no leverage to get more."

Person B: "That's not fair, but you're right I don't have leverage. Excuse me, person C, can you help me? I'd like to set a floor on wages at $30"

Person C: "Ok, let's do that."

Libertarians have this fantasy that people like working for minimum wage. It's nonsense. They are willing to do it, in the absence of any alternative, but that's an entirely different thing. When the government sets a minimum wage, it isn't doing it against the will of both the employer and employee. That's a lie told by the employer. The employee wants it - they just don't have the bargaining power.

[–]LowReadyIndividual Sovereignty 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 9 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]stupendousman 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 6 時間前 (0子コメント)

a worker wants more money, but doesn't have the bargaining power to get it.

Yes, that's one definition of unskilled. They don't have a high value skill set.

So they go to the government and ask the government to help by setting a floor on wages.

Government isn't a magical word that obviates ethical considerations. Appealing to a third party to use force and coercion on others is wrong. It's using violence or threats of violence instead of peaceful negotiation.

We're both answering the demand in our own way, imposing our own morality on the situation. What's the difference?

One morality advocates the use of violence, one doesn't. Quite a difference.

People support minimum wage laws, and pass them by referenda.

If people supported them they wouldn't need to use force to increase wages.

Person B: "That's not fair, but you're right I don't have leverage. Excuse me, person C, can you help me? I'd like to set a floor on wages at $30"

Leverage?! You mean threats?

Libertarians have this fantasy that people like working for minimum wage.

Really? I've never seen any fan fiction about that.

They are willing to do it, in the absence of any alternative,

There's no alternative? No possible action someone might take to increase the value of their labor?

The employee wants it - they just don't have the bargaining power.

I want a Lamborghini, but I won't use violence or threats of violence to acquire one.

[–]Warnings -1 ポイント0 ポイント1 ポイント 13 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]Zifnab25Filthy Statist 3 ポイント4 ポイント5 ポイント 13 時間前 (2子コメント)

[–]Warnings 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 13 時間前 (0子コメント)

This is known as a Debt Trap, where costs rise faster than incomes and individuals are forced to engage in increasingly short-term thinking for survival. The long-term effects of a chronic debt trap are bankruptcy, endemic poverty, and reduction of life-expectancy.

Not to mention the cognitive effects of financial hardship. While IQ is a shit metric for "intelligence" a 13 IQ point equivalent drop due to financial hardship means something undesirable is happening.

Just one individual experiencing that is sad it's not reason enough to worry policymakers. The effect of that individual washes out with millions of others operating in the economy. It's when you push a large portion of a population into economic hardship you end up with a less productive workforce due to marginal cognitive declines.

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] -5 ポイント-4 ポイント-3 ポイント 13 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]beaker38 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 10 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] -3 ポイント-2 ポイント-1 ポイント 13 時間前 (6子コメント)

[–]VStarffin 1 ポイント2 ポイント3 ポイント 13 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]marx2k -2 ポイント-1 ポイント0 ポイント 8 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig 2 ポイント3 ポイント4 ポイント 12 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Diesel-66 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 5 時間前 (0子コメント)

[+]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-7 ポイント-6 ポイント-5 ポイント 12 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig 4 ポイント5 ポイント6 ポイント 11 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]VicisSubsistominarchist 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 13 時間前 (4子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 12 時間前 (3子コメント)

[–]Diesel-66 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 5 時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]VicisSubsistominarchist 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 12 時間前 (1子コメント)

[–]bluefootedpig 0 ポイント1 ポイント2 ポイント 10 時間前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 27719 on app-300 at 2015-02-04 07:48:16.229687+00:00 running a8a8b44 country code: JP.

Libertarian

Free association.

Freedom of the individual.

Related Subreddits:

調停者