One of the local big-mouthed/small-brained variety of progressives has been lecturing us ad nauseum about how to fix the problems of poverty, particularly if the greedy business owners would be willing to just give all of their employees more pay. Much of this 'advice' is aimed at the service industry, meaning restaurants, stores, hotels, and so on.
But as usual she puts forth straw man arguments to bolster the correctness of her viewpoint, choosing to ignore the economic realities of what she's proposing.
Take a good look around and notice the age range of the employees. Ask them if they are free to speak with you for a couple of minutes without fear of 'being caught'. Ask about their hourly wages, or if they have any medical and dental benefits, vacation time, or personal leave.I particularly liked that last line: “Don't forget to ask if they are unionized.” As if that is actually going to indicate anything other than they are behind the times. Unions rarely work on the behalf of the rank and file. They work for what benefits the union leaders and rarely take into account the actual wishes of the people they represent. (I say this as a former 20-year member of a labor union. They are not your friends.)
Go a step further. Make appointments with the store managers. Let them know that you'd be interested in working for their company. Fill out an application and take whatever test is required. Ask about their wage and benefit package. Ask how they designate part-time and full-time employees. Oh, and don't forget to ask if they are unionized.
While this clueless person brings up the age of the employees, she should ask why most of them tend to be older. Could it be that older workers are more reliable than teens and are, quite frankly, worth what they're being paid? Could it also be that many of those older folks would be more than happy to work jobs that weren't low-paying if the Obama Administration and at least one of the preceding administrations hadn't worked so hard to make better paying middle class jobs disappear by creating huge incentives for business to move many of the good jobs overseas by creating disincentives to keep their operations here in the US? She and her ilk rarely mention that little item when they talk about jobs, do they? Or if they do, they lay the blame on NAFTA which in fact helped create more jobs here in the US.
By proposing to raise the minimum wage to an unsustainable and arbitrarily high level, this loudmouth thinks all of our problems will be solved. But all one has to do to see the falsehood of that belief is to look to Washington state, particularly Seattle and the Seattle-Tacoma area where the minimum wage is headed up to $15/hour. (It's already there in the SeaTac area.) What's been the effects? Lost jobs, lost benefits, shorter work weeks, and a lot of full-time jobs being turned into part-time jobs. In hotels and restaurants tipping has all but disappeared. Free meals to employees are a thing of the past. Some employees in the local hotels now have to pay for parking that was once part of their compensation. Businesses have decide not to expand, with some leaving the area altogether. The price of artificially raising the cost of labor is less jobs because those jobs have been priced outside what business owners can afford to pay.
But wait, there's more!
Compared with other developed countries our wages and benefits are an outright insult to lower and middle class working families. It used to be that if someone worked hard they would be able to make a good living, increase their financial standing, and be able to pass on a better life to their children.This pompous ass then goes on to (yet again) lay the blame solely at the feet of Republican lawmakers, choosing to ignore that many of the problems were created by members of their own political party, passing laws, rules, and regulations that kept making it more difficult to run a business, specifically a small business. Members of the Democrat party talk about protecting jobs, but kowtow to crony capitalists and rent-seekers who want to make sure no one can compete against them, which in the end costs jobs and causes higher prices. They labor under the false impression, one carefully crafted by their ideological masters, that wealth is a zero sum game, and all of their actions are based upon that mistaken belief. Ironically, one of their icons, John F. Kennedy, understood that wealth is dynamic, that it can shrink or grow, and that if it grows, that “rising tide” of growing wealth “raises all ships.”
But to this close-minded drone, the only way to achieve prosperity is for the government to mandate it. Never mind that every single time that has been tried over the past 400-some years, it has failed miserably and created more poverty, more want...and in the end, more death. What's ironic is that this progressive genius has never so much as run a lemonade stand, let alone any business...just like their progressive savior, Obama.
That right there says a lot.