Ah, but Seattle is legislating magnanimity and telling businesses to spend more on labor than it was able to get in a more free market. That is, Seattle has raised the price floor for labor. That's the issue. It might work out, it might not. Let's wait a few years and see how it goes. Those who are skeptical are not necessarily assholes.

I think there should be a longer phase in, but I agree with you on this one Paul.

I don't think that there is anything that anyone can do to "help my business survive". $15/now just means I'll just have to work 2 jobs for an extra couple of years while I chase my dream of being self-employed. In the meantime, I'll hire my friends to work at my business and be happy for them that their lives are a little better off.

Pouring my heart and soul into something that only monetarily rewards other people (for now - dream big!) is worth doing for me or it isn't. If it isn't, I will stop. Simple as that.

So what is your solution then, Paul?

@2 - How kind of you to explain that to all of us.

@7
What do you think of the maxim "Kill Them With Kindness?"

Theoretically I am attracted to it for an unknowable reason. However, the ways I've heard it used in the real world have left me disgusted.

@2 - A "free market" does not exist, that assumes that all parties have equal power in negotiating wages and working conditions. They don't. Employers have *far* more power, and worker --esp. workers without the power of collective bargaining-- are highly vulnerable to this power. Why do you think most employers discourage their workers discussing wages? So they can pay them differently! And they do exactly that.

Wages are not accorded to actual skill and ability, they are accorded to whatever the worker has been conditioned --or manipulated-- to accept, if they don't know any better, they get screwed, and can't do anything about it. That is not 'equal party negotiations'.

This "free market" concept is a semantic illusion that disguises the actual brutality of the market. It's anything but "free".

Don't look at me.

I would love our society to return to a wide, voluminous middle class that is literate and wealthy.

They will consume more knowledge product.

Also, when Paul enlightens us by saying the "We're all human beings," I'm not arguing, but I would appreciate a source for his claim. Paul?

Just feel like all these irresponsible businesses shouldn't be opening if their business model means they can't pay someone enough to live while working for them. What kind of lazy, irresponsible person does that? Do they think the rest of us (including, ultimately, the business owners themselves) want to pay for their failure to make a proper plan?

Possibly relevant, definitely interesting -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnij…

"Wealth Inequality in America"

"Infographics on the distribution of wealth in America, highlighting both the inequality and the difference between our perception of inequality and the actual numbers. The reality is often not what we think it is."

@10 Hence, "more free" in my comment. I agree with you and unions have helped to make the labor market more fair. In some labor markets, such as those for CEOs and movie stars, the bargaining power is with the suppliers, not the buyers. Generally speaking businesses have more bargaining power, which creates distortions. But price controls like minimum wages also create distortions. As it was, my hunch is that the lower minimum wage acted as a standard of sort, giving employers no real need to compete on price with other businesses. But is $15 perhaps too high? We'll see.

#17

Fine, but ask yourself this -- how many companies make products which are bought by robots?

I still don't see the endgame of total automation.

Most of our companies produce products for a vast global marketplace.

Smartphones, automobiles...

Much of that technology and industry is used either business to busines (B2B) or in the service of work (commuter cars on highways or rush hour trains).

Humans are not only the workers, but the consumers of that work. Even javascript coders are employed to serve millions who order clothing on Amazon. No paychecks, no millions...no e-commerce?

Or if Robots replace humans in building cars, then people don't have to drive cars to the factory where the cars are built.

And so on...

So is robotization really de-industrialization?

Solar, wind and hydrogen as an energy source falls into this category as well.

If we don't have to mine energy, or build equipment to mine it, then we don't need the gasoline to power the dump trucks and oil rigs.

What do we do all day, and how many of us, are the big questions.

@10, actually a free market does not assume that everyone has equal bargaining power. The distinction is that there is no intervention by government or another authority to set prices. Of course we already have a national minimum wage, so the labor market is not free by that definition. You may be thinking of a perfect market, in which no one participant has the power to set prices. That is, there are so many suppliers and so many buyers that none of them can affect the price for the good. I don't imagine that labor markets fit into this category.

Markets only function when negotiations over price can be conducted fairly and with equal knowledge. In our current labor market we see serious break downs at both the top and bottom of the ladder.

At the bottom individuals have no negotiation power and no collective bargaining power so it behooves the people to set the wage floor at a position where most full time workers do not require public assistance simply for life's necessities.

At the top individuals have so much negotiation power that they simply rob shareholders blind even to the point of receiving lifetime compensation far exceeding that of the company's workers when fired for cause. Memo to people. Deal with this next.

And then of course there's all the run of the mill problems even with employees who have reasonable negotiation power. But regulators at least have some record of dealing with illegal non-poaching agreements and the like.

@8: "My objection to the $15 minimum wage is that it acts as a disincentive to hire low skill workers."

I keep hearing this, or variations on it. It sounds good on its face - "Someone with low skills may be worth ten dollars an hour, but not fifteen." But what it presumes is that there is a pool of more highly skilled workers that would be ready, willing, and able to do the jobs currently held by lower skilled workers, if only they paid enough.

A "high skilled" (whatever that means) worker who isn't interested in washing dishes at $10 an hour is going to be no more interested in it at $15 an hour.

If she has a job already which requires her level of skill, and which one assumes she enjoys and which pays her enough to live on, do you really believe she'll give it up because now she can make $15 an hour while not using her skills to perform a job she will probably enjoy less?

And if she does not have a job, don't you think she'd have already taken the dishwashing job? Even at $10 an hour, it beats unemployment.

Next someone will say that an employer, given the choice between a low skill worker and a high skill worker, will choose the low skill worker for $10 an hour but the high skill worker for $15 an hour, even if the job is identical at both wages. Which is... just ludicrous. There are reasons an employer might choose a less skilled worker for a position - they may be more content with tedious or difficult work, they are less likely to leave for a better job - but those reasons exist at all salary levels.

@15, thanks for posting this! I think it is totally relevant, and shows why this is such an important discussion to have.

I loved this article for a million reasons, thank you.

There is no such thing as a free market, and the tax subsidized Mercantalists know it

Real Capitalists recognize that fact

Soon the burger-flippers will be machines anyways. And the order-takers. You'll just go up to the window and take your box of Soylent out of the dispenser and eat it without ever seeing another human.

I don't think the role that the consumer plays in keeping workers' wages low has been emphasized enough. Consumers demand increasingly lower prices for the products they want, and businesses demand increasingly higher profit, with the workers caught in between.

A business that is unable to be successful while paying their workers an ethical wage has a flawed business model and shouldn't be in business anyway. At the same time, consumers have a responsibility to make sure that they are not demanding a better deal at the expense of workers.

If the city can't deliver $15 now, perhaps consumers might consider supporting businesses that voluntarily raise their minimum wages before required by law.

@18, 20 - I understood 'free market' to mean that a worker was free to accept or not accept a job. That is most certainly not the case, esp. when people are paid below a living wage: They live paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford to remove their labor and freely look for different work. People are coerced, essentially, to work for whatever they can obtain. Debt and specifically student debt is a major part of this coercion.

One might assume that a fair day's work should be able to obtain a living wage, no matter the work involved. The 'market' appears quite happy to pay people below-poverty wages for doing the same amount of work as other people. A standard, baseline job should allow a person to afford shelter and food and a bit of savings. Not always living one hospital bill away from the edge of disaster and homelessness. That is a basic problem with our economic system. One that the 'free market' will not correct on it's own.

What exactly is a living wage? I'd say $15 is too low. More like $20-25 in Seattle.

@29 Exactly my feelings on the matter.

That was the point of the minimum wage to begin with. I used to work for L&I here in Washington and to be honest they haven't kept up or pushed to keep up with the COLI regulations they have set.

If they had the entire state would be sitting at close to $20 an hour.

"Just because you started a small business does not mean you have any more of a right to life than anyone else."

I dig how the whole premise of his opinion-piece is a strawmen.

No one ever suggested such a thing. That's the sad part of ANYTHING that The Stranger whines about now. It's just them setting up their own premises and then proving/disproving them. Constructive consideration? Deductive logic free from bias? That'd be nice to see.

So, while someone that started a businesses has no "...more of a right to life than anyone else.", they have realities and perspective that is more relevant. But, that's too big of an idea to get past the agenda of the kids who work at a The Stranger these days.

"Business owners already spend long hours awake late at night, worried about how they're going to make ends meet. So let's start having that conversation."

"start"? START!!!!??? Paul!? "start"!? We should "start having that conversation"!? Why "start" now, Paul? It's too damned late for that, Sir. It does not matter anymore. It'll take YEARS to see the true effects of this mess, but it'll be too late, so why "start" that discussion? That's like starting a discussion about getting a map or asking directions after y'r lost, don't'cha think?

"...let's start talking about how to help your business survive."

Too late for that, man. It's up to reality to have it's way with us.

@32 Actually I've seen that logic suggested repeatedly by many people posting on Facebook, Twitter, etc.

So before you say 'no one' perhaps you should realize that you're not everyone, and other people have made comments that you maybe haven't seen.

So you setup an even worse logical fallacy than the one you are claiming they are engaging in...and yet don't even realize it somehow.

Kudos. That takes effort.

Also you're letting the business owners off easy. They can have useful dialogs and plan things out. This IS reality and they will have to deal with it. If they cannot sustain their business models then their business models were entirely flawed to begin with.

@30 The main options in society today are to either get a college education or be shunted off into poverty.

There are very few exceptions to this case...and before you try to provide an anecdote to prove otherwise you should realize that you won't win with me. :)

@27 "Consumers demand increasingly lower prices for the products they want, and businesses demand increasingly higher profit, with the workers caught in between."

I would venture that there is a link between the consumers demanding lower prices and the workers getting squeezed: if you're not making much, you need to buy the cheapest things available to you. It's a vicious circle, the opposite of what we saw in the post WW2 years, when workers used their relatively larger disposable income to afford more, and better, stuff..

Bingo @35

Translation for @34: "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's made up." Good to know.

@27: Those workers that you say are caught in between ARE the consumers as well. They need those low prices because they're making $8 an hour. It's the Walmart-ization of America.

@8: "Why can't we allow businesses to pay people what their worth and, if that isn't enough to live on, top off their incomes with public subsidies like food stamps and the earned income tax credit? "

please tell me that's ironic.

"Government steps in to make business behave in our best interests. That's one of government's primary roles in the modern world"

Right. Because they have such an awesome track record of doing exactly this. (sarcasm)

Articles like this is exactly why I dont read the stranger as much as I used to. First off, I have never read anyone "demonizing" burger flippers, (actually calling them that is sort of insulting considering I did a lot more than that when I cooked for a restaurant, but anyway...), saying small business is "god", or no one deserves a "living wage". Paul Constant - obviously you have not been listening to the majority of voices in opposition to the $15 hr mandate since you have no clue on what they are saying.

This article is just so silly and nonsensical.

@37 Not at all. I've been able to read since the age of 2, and was considered a prodigy by the age 3. I was invited to speak to international education councils while I was in grade school, and nominated as an international student ambassador by the time I reached 5th grade.

I went to work for the government straight out of school (back in the 90s) and have worked for some of the largest companies in the world consulting with executives on their projects and roadmaps.

I've forgotten more about nearly every topic in existence than your entire family line has likely ever learned.

Also my point about anecdotes is that anecdotes are not evidence. They are simply a small viewpoint story that does nothing to prove an overall larger picture.

I didn't say they couldn't provide me with proof. I said don't waste time with useless anecdotes.

Perhaps if you had higher than a 3rd grade education you would know how to read things in context. :)

Someone mentioned "supporting" businesses. It doesn't work that way.

Customers do not "support" a business.
Customers "buy" from a business and usually for the lowest price possible.

If a customer does not get the best mix of quality, convenience, quantity etc etc for the lowest possible price, s/he will disappear asap. Customers are cold-blooded. Even Stranger customers.

@43 No they do not. They just know that the person who put this in place has a PhD in Economics from one of the best universities in the world, and is a highly educated individual otherwise who has done the math on this.

It has nothing to do with goodwill, and it has nothing to do with ignoring the laws of economics. In fact it has everything to do WITH heeding what is actually a sound policy.

@40 Really? You've never read someone against the $15 min wage saying "why should a burger flipper get more money than me? I deserve it more!"

Can we trade facebook friends?

@22 Your comment is worded so perfectly. It will help me when trying to articulate these points in the future.

@41

I'd agree. But I believe both could/should be implemented.

@47

"Such things have been tried in other countries. They usually end badly. You can read more about that here:"

Perhaps you should say "country" instead of "countries". But I do agree to an extent. With increased globalization, multinational corporations are able to exploit the poor in other nations in order to drive down wages in others. And we cannot resolve this unless countries are willing to, on some level, regulate free trade.

"Stop pretending that business is a magnanimous God."

This is frivolous and insulting. And dehumanizing. It's amazing how a post claiming to humanize the conversation devolves quickly into dehumanizing small business owners. It makes no acknowledgement of the small business community that have been supportive of this action. It's lazy.

Jerks on the internet are nothing new. They are especially familiar to Stranger readers. Hopes diminish daily for the writers at this paper to rise above.

Damn straight Constant. As someone who grew up in poverty, struggled to go to school and am now POORER than I was in my 20s, the incessant need to demonize the poor makes me want to vomit. If you're well off you're not magically a better, superior or smarter person you're just LUCKY.

And as long as we're attacking jingoism and bullshit justifications for treating people like shit, this is NOT a 'Recession', k? This is an economic Depression.

"If you're well off you're not magically a better, superior or smarter person you're just LUCKY."

You tell yourself that if it makes you feel better. Luckily I had discipline. Luckily I had the foresight to sacrifice now to build my future. Luckily I chose a degree which lead to a high paying, high demand job. Luckily I got top grades. Luckily I mastered the subject material, and didn't just pass the tests. Luckily I competed successfully for a lucky great job. Luckily my performance has been excellent. Luckily I don't flip burgers. Luckily I don't have to be so pathetic a person as to see the world in terms of pathetic envy.

Yeah, it's magic. To you and the people like you, it's lucky magic. Good luck with that.

@56: It's pretty funny that you think anybody here envies you for any reason, so thanks for that.

I totally agree with comment #56, trying to belittle or take away the hard work of educated people that bettered themselves is just as ignorant as demonizing the poor.

@56 Are you trying to pretend you're someone important again?