Unexpected Consequences: Min Wage Hike Fallout

[Atomic Playboy]

Maybe not, but there are still the heavily subsidized student loans. I helped him transfer his phone's billing responsibility after he left college so he could maintain his Unlimited Data with Verizon... which makes me wonder if he gave up his Unlimited data to upgrade (doubt he could afford to buy it out-right without a carrier subsidy). I never implied that he was paying on the car because I know he isn't. The beater Honda they sent him off to school with died and they got him the used Corolla half-way through, though it was a surprisingly late model for a used car. On the other hand, I am still paying on my Corolla that's cheaper in every way (manual locks, windows, transmission, etc). They look almost identical but he has pinstripes, window tinting, a little antenna nub on the top, etc. if it weren't for the smashed-in driver's door, I'd feel jealous.

Why can't the poors in this country just get free cars from their parents? That's called BEING RESPONSIBLE you freeloaders.

What point are you trying to make here? You're talking about how comfortably he lives on little income, but he's obviously getting additional income / free things from his parents, which puts him in a different situation than almost everyone else on food stamps in this country. He's not really a representative sample of the life people on welfare can expect to live, yeah?

 

[CZroe]

Why can't the poors in this country just get free cars from their parents? That's called BEING RESPONSIBLE you freeloaders.



What point are you trying to make here? You're talking about how comfortably he lives on little income, but he's obviously getting additional income / free things from his parents, which puts him in a different situation than almost everyone else on food stamps in this country. He's not really a representative sample of the life people on welfare can expect to live, yeah?

Tense is important. That was several years ago while he was still in college. He has not been in college or with his parents for several years but he still gets food stamps and lives comfortably on less than $15,000 a year.

 

[brycejones]

Maybe not, but there are still the heavily subsidized student loans. I helped him transfer his phone's billing responsibility after he left college so he could maintain his Unlimited Data with Verizon... which makes me wonder if he gave up his Unlimited data to upgrade (doubt he could afford to buy it out-right without a carrier subsidy).

I never implied that he was paying on the car because I know he isn't. The beater Honda they sent him off to school with died and they got him the used Corolla half-way through, though it was a surprisingly late model for a used car. On the other hand, I am still paying on my Corolla that's cheaper in every way (manual locks, windows, transmission, etc). They look almost identical but he has pinstripes, window tinting, a little antenna nub on the top, etc. if it weren't for the smashed-in driver's door, I'd feel jealous.

So you're basically butt hurt because your room mate gets stuff from his parents? Should we change welfare so that anything you get from a 3rd party for any reason should count as income and if they get to much they become ineligible? How do you know his parents didn't pay for the phone as well?

 

[CZroe]

So you're basically butt hurt because your room mate gets stuff from his parents? Should we change welfare so that anything you get from a 3rd party for any reason should count as income and if they get to much they become ineligible? How do you know his parents didn't pay for the phone as well?

Nope. You completely misread. I am simply being honest about his living situation by making it clear that there is no car payment and there are still car expenses he hadn't been able to afford or willing to pay full price for and isn't being paid for by his parents (oil, repair). Since college several years ago I am not aware of any on-going assistance from his parents. The only assistance he got from his parents I am aware of since he moved back to Georgia years ago is his new step dad loaning us unused furniture (table and chairs) and spending a day to help us move in (truck and trailer). To this day that's the only time I've ever seen his stepdad. Haven't seen his mom since either.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Tense is important. That was several years ago while he was still in college. He has not been in college or with his parents for several years but he still gets food stamps and lives comfortably on less than $15,000 a year.

Yes, tense is important... because you said he still had this car that he didn't pay for. Even if he got it ages ago, getting a car for free is an option that isn't available to the vast majority of people on welfare, and transportation costs can be fairly expensive, especially for people who don't have the option of living near their jobs. You're discounting all the things he's gotten for free as though those aren't expenses that would affect the working poor elsewhere in this country, and that's a ridiculous standard to set up as your base of comparison.

 

[CZroe]

Yes, tense is important... because you said he still had this car that he didn't pay for. Even if he got it ages ago, getting a car for free is an option that isn't available to the vast majority of people on welfare, and transportation costs can be fairly expensive, especially for people who don't have the option of living near their jobs. You're discounting all the things he's gotten for free as though those aren't expenses that would affect the working poor elsewhere in this country, and that's a ridiculous standard to set up as your base of comparison.

Yes, and all people living or raising a family on minimum wage are paying on a perpetual car note and NONE entered the work force with pre-existing resources?

I was raised on welfare with ZERO income that wasn't from the government. There were periods where we did not own a car but we owned several over the course of my childhood and were never stuck making payments. My mother was a single parent raising twins and her take was $280 a month plus food stamps until we were old enough to get work and she went back to school. Don't pretend to think you know more than me about this.

It's actually kind of funny that people think a perpetual car payment must be included in the cost of living for people living on minimum wage. Even if you have a car payment, it's not the same thing as a 30-year mortgage.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Yes, and all people living or raising a family on minimum wage are paying on a perpetual car note and NONE entered the work force with pre-existing resources?

Listen to yourself. I was raised on welfare with ZERO income that wasn't from the government. There were periods where we did not own a car but we owner several over the course of my childhood and were never stuck making payments. My mother was a single parent raising twins and her take was $280 a month plus food stamps until we were old enough to get work and she went back to school. Don't pretend to think you know more than me about this.

It's actually kind of funny that people think a perpetual car payment must be included in the cost of living for people living on minimum wage. Even if you have a car payment, it's not the same thing as a 30-year mortgage.

I didn't say a car payment; I said transportation costs. It could be a bus pass; that shit still costs money. Even operating a car has fixed costs associated with it, in the form of fuel and routine maintenance. But you can't point to someone who had help in the form of being given a car (which is the second-most expensive purchase most people will make behind their home) and say that this is the model for how to be poor and comfortable. If your contention is that it's something that can be done, it's worth noting where additional help was provided that is unreasonable for most people to expect. Getting by on $15k is still pretty impressive, regardless of the car, but he's not the average case of the working poor in America.

 

[CZroe]

I didn't say a car payment; I said transportation costs. It could be a bus pass; that shit still costs money. Even operating a car has fixed costs associated with it, in the form of fuel and routine maintenance. But you can't point to someone who had help in the form of being given a car (which is the second-most expensive purchase most people will make behind their home) and say that this is the model for how to be poor and comfortable. If your contention is that it's something that can be done, it's worth noting where additional help was provided that is unreasonable for most people to expect. Getting by on $15k is still pretty impressive, regardless of the car, but he's not the average case of the working poor in America.

I didn't say that it was a model. My point, in direct response to Subyman's post about able-bodied young men on government assistance, was that it really does exist.

I gave an anecdotal example of one able-bodied young man on government assistance and living comfortably at minimum-wage levels with little incentive to change things until a major life event (marriage, child, etc).

Tell me how my point is invalid because some people couldn't carry a car over from their time prior to striking out on their own. I want to hear this.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I didn't say that it was a model. My point, in direct response to Subyman's post about able-bodied young men on government assistance, was that it really does exist.

I gave an example of one able-bodied young man on government assistance and living comfortable at minimum-wage levels with little incentive to change things until a major life event (marriage, child, etc). Tell me how my point is invalid because some people couldn't carry a car over from their time prior to striking out on their own. I want to hear this.

OK, it does exist, but it's comparatively rare and probably shouldn't be the standard we base our public assistance laws around. I've known people like that too; skirt by on assistance for a few years in the "don't really give a shit" period of life before moving on to better things when they realize that having money is kind of awesome. But you can't treat that as the norm when you're talking about all people on public assistance, and bringing it up as an example just undermines people who legitimately need public assistance to get by. They're not all freeloaders or people just coasting through life.

 

[CZroe]

OK, it does exist, but it's comparatively rare and probably shouldn't be the standard we base our public assistance laws around. I've known people like that too; skirt by on assistance for a few years in the "don't really give a shit" period of life before moving on to better things when they realize that having money is kind of awesome. But you can't treat that as the norm when you're talking about all people on public assistance, and bringing it up as an example just undermines people who legitimately need public assistance to get by. They're not all freeloaders or people just coasting through life.

Sure, some people have to start with nothing and have more responsibilities, but why should THAT be the standard? I never implied that a minimum wage job was enough for that, nor should it be. People being in different situations with different needs is precisely my point. Those people should not be trying to live off a minimum wage job.

It's a fallacy that higher paying jobs for unskilled workers with more responsibilities (family, car payment, etc) do not exist. They exist but they require more hours and more effort (manual labor), which discourages entitled people who think that a minimum-wage job "should" support such things.

It's not for them. It's for people like my roommate. Pretending that the base level needs to be higher so that people with more responsibilities can get by without working harder or moving out of the city is preposterous.

 

[Darwin333]

The above is extremely telling, because if this is true, then it wasn't ever about a "livable wage" -- it was about them using the Government in order to buy more "stuff".

People should welcome the chance to be self-sufficient and get off Government Assistance -- I know I would.

The problem is that most government assistance is not designed be a "hand up" it's simply a handout. It doesn't make financial sense for a person to make an additional $200 a month and loose $300 in food stamps, free healthcare and maybe even housing assistance.

I personally know a mother who has a child with an expensive illness. She has the ability to get a decent paying job and get off of all assistance except for medicaid (or care, whichever it is) for her child. Given a year or two she will more than likely be able to afford her insurance and medical bills. The problem is if she takes the job she would lose the medical assistance and her child simply can not go those few years without healthcare.

This is a person who doesn't want to be on the dole but what other choice does she have? Therein lies the problem with the way we handle assistance programs. They should be aimed at helping people get off of them and giving incentive to better yourself to the point that you don't need it. Instead, more times than not, it holds people down. The jump in pay they need to offset the loss of assistance programs is just to large and instead of tapering off a lot of programs have a hard ceiling were if you make a dollar over that you don't receive anything anymore.

 

[fskimospy]

The only way you ever take context into account is to find some way to superficially justify your own predetermined ideologically driven opinion, such as insisting that "all lives matter" actually means "not all lives matter". It's quite amusing therefore to see you call anyone dishonest.

I'm totally shocked that when your glaring hypocrisy is pointed out you ignore it and blame other people.

 

[Subyman]

Maybe not, but there are still the heavily subsidized student loans. I helped him transfer his phone's billing responsibility after he left college so he could maintain his Unlimited Data with Verizon... which makes me wonder if he gave up his Unlimited data to upgrade (doubt he could afford to buy it out-right without a carrier subsidy).

I never implied that he was paying on the car because I know he isn't. The beater Honda they sent him off to school with died and they got him the used Corolla half-way through, though it was a surprisingly late model for a used car. On the other hand, I am still paying on my Corolla that's cheaper in every way (manual locks, windows, transmission, etc). They look almost identical but he has pinstripes, window tinting, a little antenna nub on the top, etc. if it weren't for the smashed-in driver's door, I'd feel jealous.

My point with my initial post is that most welfare recipients that take in the majority of government assistance who are of working age are parents and the disabled. The disabled can't work. So the hypothetical person that most people get angry about government assistance is typically a young man that sits at home doing nothing, but that is a very rare occurrence. And, as you've shown, is practically impossible without some sort of job and family support.

The OP started this by being angry at people that hypothetically work 40 hours a week and still have to be on government assistance and are now only needing to work 30-35 hours a week. Those people are likely very rare and are stuck in a peculiar position of making less money if they worked longer hours. I don't believe many people are stuck in that limbo situation and certainly not enough to argue against minimum wage increases. The actual argument should be to adjust government assistance thresholds to match wage increases, which is likely already done in some form.

 

[werepossum]

What matters to me or doesn't matter to me is irrelevant here. I'm simply informing you of the fact that a large portion of the businesses affected by minimum wage hikes aren't mobile, and the whole 'displaced business' thing is a lot less impactful than you appear to think it is.

What housing program in Seattle do you think provides that sort of benefit? The only one that really applies that I could think of is Section 8, and that subsidizes a portion of your rent, not the whole thing. In many (most?) cases it's not enough to have your own place as a single guy.

Dunno, I'm not familiar with Seattle assistance programs. But please recall that this thread is about people having to ask for fewer hours because of otherwise losing housing benefits. If one is losing one's housing benefits, then what housing benefits are provided is immaterial to whether one could or should live with a roommate.

And for the first paragraph, thanks for once again demonstrating that patented proggie concern for other people. Identity politics for the loss once again.

Yes, and all people living or raising a family on minimum wage are paying on a perpetual car note and NONE entered the work force with pre-existing resources?

I was raised on welfare with ZERO income that wasn't from the government. There were periods where we did not own a car but we owned several over the course of my childhood and were never stuck making payments. My mother was a single parent raising twins and her take was $280 a month plus food stamps until we were old enough to get work and she went back to school. Don't pretend to think you know more than me about this.

It's actually kind of funny that people think a perpetual car payment must be included in the cost of living for people living on minimum wage. Even if you have a car payment, it's not the same thing as a 30-year mortgage.

Kudos to your mom for raising good kids under very difficult circumstances, for putting her children before herself, and for getting herself off welfare once the kids could be left alone. None of those things are easy.

I'm totally shocked that when your glaring hypocrisy is pointed out you ignore it and blame other people.

lol M'kay. Not sure how you take my mocking as blaming other people, but at least I'm used to it.

 

[werepossum]

Just so we're on the same page, from the OP's link:

Comix Experience, a small book store in downtown San Francisco, has begun selling graphic novel club subscriptions in order to meet payroll. The owner, Brian Hibbs, admits members are not getting all that much for their $25 per month dues, but their “donation” is keeping him in business.

“I was looking at potentially having to close the store down and then how would I make my living?” Hibbs asked.

To date, he’s sold 228 subscriptions. He says he needs 334 to reach his goal of the $80,000 income required to cover higher labor costs. He doesn’t blame San Francisco voters for approving the $15 minimum wage, but he doesn’t think they had all the information needed to make a good decision.​

Now obviously progressives don't give a flying fuck about people like this who cannot or struggle to keep the doors open with higher minimum wages, but hopefully the rest of us understand that things are not quite so simple as good versus evil, black and white.

 

[sandorski]

I'm not for an hour reduction to maintain the assistance, I'm down for reforming the rent assistance programs so they aren't structured stupidly.

As I said before, on the first page I think, programs should ALWAYS be structured so there is never an incentive to earn less money. For example, (made up numbers) if you get $100 a month in rental assistance, for every $5 extra you make your subsidy should go down $1, until it eventually reaches zero. This program sounds like it has a hard cutoff point, which is stupid.

That and other Government assistance need to be intelligently designed.

Here in Canada we have Cooperative Housing and other Subsidized Housing programs that are decently designed. Every apartment has a Market Price(based upon what that Unit would Cost on the open Market) and a Minimum Price. That Minimum Price would fall into what a Welfare program would Pay for, usually $3xx. If a Person on Welfare gets a Job they don't lose their Subsidy. Their Rent for the next year won't exceed 30% of their Income, up to the Market Price of the Unit. This removes the disincentive to getting a Job or getting a better Job.

I suspect similar programs exist in the US, although they are probably kinda under funded/utilized like they are here. They are an expense and often a low priority for Governments, despite the Social benefit, especially in the large and expensive cities.

 

[JSt0rm]

That and other Government assistance need to be intelligently designed.

Here in Canada we have Cooperative Housing and other Subsidized Housing programs that are decently designed. Every apartment has a Market Price(based upon what that Unit would Cost on the open Market) and a Minimum Price. That Minimum Price would fall into what a Welfare program would Pay for, usually $3xx. If a Person on Welfare gets a Job they don't lose their Subsidy. Their Rent for the next year won't exceed 30% of their Income, up to the Market Price of the Unit. This removes the disincentive to getting a Job or getting a better Job.

I suspect similar programs exist in the US, although they are probably kinda under funded/utilized like they are here. They are an expense and often a low priority for Governments, despite the Social benefit, especially in the large and expensive cities.

sounds like communism.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Just so we're on the same page, from the OP's link:

Comix Experience, a small book store in downtown San Francisco, has begun selling graphic novel club subscriptions in order to meet payroll. The owner, Brian Hibbs, admits members are not getting all that much for their $25 per month dues, but their “donation” is keeping him in business.

“I was looking at potentially having to close the store down and then how would I make my living?” Hibbs asked.

To date, he’s sold 228 subscriptions. He says he needs 334 to reach his goal of the $80,000 income required to cover higher labor costs. He doesn’t blame San Francisco voters for approving the $15 minimum wage, but he doesn’t think they had all the information needed to make a good decision.​

Now obviously progressives don't give a flying fuck about people like this who cannot or struggle to keep the doors open with higher minimum wages, but hopefully the rest of us understand that things are not quite so simple as good versus evil, black and white.

isn't it simply a sign that he has a bad business model or simply people don't want what he is offering?