Blogs
Oct 31, 2013 at 11:26 am
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Gee Goldy, now you know what it's like to be a SLOG commenter.
No matter how nice you try...someone finds a way to label you as Evil Incarnate!
1. Employers will have an enormously wider choice of employees. The pool of people who are willing to work for $15 hour will expand enormously and employers will get some very talented people who otherwise wouldn't work for current minimum wage.
2. There will be a huge influx of people moving to Seattle to get one of those $15/hr jobs so the unemployment rate will go up. Not because employers will lay off but simply because more people looking.
3, There will be higher unemployment among people who now get $9 hour. They will not be able to compete when there is a larger pool.
4. The economy will grow since labor productivity will increase due to higher-skilled workers.
I think that it is a bit overblown to claim active racism here, but there certainly are impacts that disproportionately could affect some types of ethnically owned businesses. I've noticed that businesses run by Korean- and Chinese-Americans especially do some careful financial balancing that does rely on some existing standards that don't match up with environmental or social justice activist positions.
It doesn't mean that they're against social justice any more than the min wage law proposals are racist, but it does indicate a structural inertia that would need to be overcome before those businesses could feel comfortable with future viability.
Only white skinned people who have an overblown sense of entitlement use this phrase. That is to say, not all white skinned people use it. Goldy: more transparent every day.
Does the Seattle Times have an ombudsman? I think the ridiculous statement that immigrant owned businesses are going under due to the plastic bag ban is worth sending an email over.
Hmm, so what was her father's businesses? Did he treat his workers fairly, or did he exploit them. She says he wouldn't have been able to pay his workers $15 an hour, but if we're talking about 1970s, weren't minimum wage jobs better paying? Is she saying her dad paid below the minimum wage and fucked his workers over to give her a good education? Not that he would have needed to, since college was much cheaper back in the day.
And does she realize that most of the workers at the airport doing minimum wage work are immigrants and are struggling? Are they just lazy because they're not the serial entrepreneurs her father was?
Fuck her.
Whether the government raises minimum wage or eliminates it, both are forms of socialist intervention by government. The only difference is who the laws or lack of them will favor.
Historically, the sovereign allows the lords to keep a measure of wealth because they also accept the measure of responsibility that goes with it. American corporations want the wealth created by the labor and productivity of their workers without the responsibility for them.
If we're going to eliminate laws that protect workers earnings from thieving owners, why not eliminate laws that make it a crime for workers to exact their own "free market" system of economic justice by stealing what was stolen from them back?
Well, yeah, I figured it was a longshot...
Immediately detected neoliberal know-nothing
Ignored the rest of it.
Back to porno.com.
In case anyone does not want to read Goldy's self-serving rambles, nowhere does Chan call anyone a racist, nor does she mention Goldy or The Stranger. Perhaps she is wrong, but that does not mean she is calling anyone a racist.
Are you simply being misleading on purpose, or does your ego require you to insert yourself into everything?
If another writer mischaracterized your words so blatantly, you would be screaming from the rooftops, and making multiple Slog posts about it daily.
You might make better use of time if you stay off porno.com today and go learn the meaning and correct usage of "scan."
"Racist? Who said racist? All I'm saying is that you're trying to hurt Asian immigrants who just want the same opportunities you had."
It's a simple logic.
1. If you vote for the $15 minimum wage, Sharon Pian Chan says that you'll destroy Asian immigranta' small businesses.
2. Ergo, a vote for workers is a vote against a specific subset of owners.
3. Goldy supports workers of all races getting a pay raise; thus, he is against a specific group of business owners, namely Asian immigrants at SeaTac.
4. Sharon Pian Chan called Goldy a racist.
Now, back to you.
Why do you hate Jew(s)?
golgy is a prickly little bitch, isn't she...
It's rhetorical hyperbole. It ridicules Pian Chan's identity politics gambit by example. That's the whole.
So go find something real to get outraged about.
@25: My point was that the headline is misleading, and false accusations can cause harm, especially in this medium where context is easily lost. You like to play this game where you are a serious journalist when it suits you, and a whacky unaccountable blogger when that suits you better. If you want people to take you seriously, be serious.
The idea that you would accuse someone of using emotionally charged language as a distraction is laughably hypocritical, I am surprised you could even bear to type it. Actually, no I'm not.
Also, I do not care enough about you to be outraged, so bring that ego down a bit more. I am running out the clock at work, the same reason why anyone reads your blogging. Oh look, and here is the end of my day, so fare thee well.
I finally read Chan's article.
I can't see how she is accusing anyone of racism. She is arguing for a narrow economic interest (and may not be accurate in any objective sense).
But racist? No.
Your post is way overboard.
Why have you libeled Goldy by calling him not "serious"?
He could lose his job.
Who would feed his dog?
Also, does your employer know that you "run down the clock"? ...sounds a little selfish and greedy. I hope you're not stealing from an immigrant business owner.
Have you met Theodore Gorath?
You two should date.
I certainly don't begrudge those who need help, I'd love to see these programs expanded and would be more than happy to pay the increased taxes to do so. But if all of your employees need government assistance to survive, then exploiting them through low wages. It's as simple as that.
See @35...
Oh. But evidently, it's OK when you and your colleagues do the same thing - for instance, this bullying smear from Holden a few weeks ago, accusing a Times reporter of racism by filling her mouth with words she never said:
this is called "grasping at straws" and makes you look stupid whilst nobody else gives a fuck about the point you're attempting to make.
Sharon Chan: "This law could hurt immigrants."
Goldy: "Waahh! She called me racist!!!!!"
Yes you idiot tool, calling people by a racist expletive is racist. Using someones real name is not racist.
It it that hard for you to understand?
BTW I'm Jewish.
Special interest coalitions that are organized along occupational lines, groups that share a ānarrow economic interestā, do not represent the interests of the larger Asian community. This is racial politics that acts like itās interests are on behalf of minorities when they are really advocating for a type of business or professionals. They don't care about Asians, they care about business owners.
She falls down on the economics at countless turns. Raising the minimum wage would make the transition from worker to business owner shorter for many people due to increased ability to purchase larger items, like cars and houses, and accrue down payments faster. As noted in the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicagoās working paper on The Spending and Debt Responses to Minimum Wage Increases: "We ļ¬nd that the model that best matches these facts is an augmented buļ¬er stock model in which households can borrow against part, but not all, of the value of their durable goods. If households face collateral constraints, small income increases can generate small down payments, which in turn can be used for large durable goods purchases. With a 20 percent down payment, each additional dollar of income can be used to purchase ļ¬ve dollars of durable goods"
And yet the title of Goldy's post is what it is.
Sometimes Goldy, you write like a well-informed, but self-absorbed, petulant teenager.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
so he is just reaching out?
@44, I wouldn't have believed you could sound any more stupid than you have before today, but I was wrong.
And I put you in the same category as other Jews like Eric Cantor and Binyamin Netanyahu: ones that make all us Jews look like bad people.
I think he once claimed he's gay. I think it was when he said he was called a fag by a carload of frat boys while walking in Capitol Hill at night, and he said he protected himself by brandishing his firearm.