One pundit suggested, in the case of Seattle, it may displace the poor as over qualified people suddenly find it worthwhile to work a low-level job in town. The poor are forced to commute to the burbs as that is where the low-level jobs for poor people are.

...and the person who found a book they want to buy, but, it costs a thousand dollars, so you can afford to pay that worthless book shelver $50/hr.

"It also, however took down thousands upon thousands of innocent individuals who never made any of the unwise decisions that killed their employer."

If a body can't or won't self-employ and therefore works for others, then a body should cling to the idea of 'employee beware' (or, 'cover your own ass', or, 'keep one eye open all the time').

To assume your employer is honest or wise or simply a good business person is foolish.

Seems to me: an employee should always expect to be screwed over by the boss.

#

"we share our wisdom"

Wisdom unfortunately laced with insanity much of the time, so much so it's hard to distinguish one from the other.

##

"you can't legislate for morality or against greed, if you could no one would try to find loopholes."

I think lookin' for loopholes is distinctly human and unavoidable as evidenced by every murder and rape and act of theft (all of which have been legislated against, largely because each is 'wrong' [immoral]).

"...and the person who found a book they want to buy, but, it costs a thousand dollars, so you can afford to pay that worthless book shelver $50/hr."

As I say: 'If I over-value, then my business suffers by way of my misuse of cash', and, 'If I'm unwise then -- one way or another -- I go out of business'.

Of course, if the idiot is willing to pay me a grand for a book, who am I to turn him (or her) away?

Who said the idiot was gonna buy the book? Hell, only your shelver could afford it. And she/he ain't gonna buy it. They're gonna take it to the bathroom, and, read it on their break.

Now, you can't even sell the book, it's been in the bathroom, it's marked.

Nice Seinfeld reference! :D

Not if all the buyers are making $50/hr. And the books would not have to increase in price at all if bookstore owners who make $100MM/year reduce their own income.

[Pete Hogwallop]That. Don't. Make. No. Sense.[/Pete Hogwallop]

Thankee, ma'am.

I'm also hearing snippets of conversation in my head:

What do you do?

I program CNC milling machines for the aviation machining industry.

How much do ya make doing that?

Minimum wage.

Hmm

*applauds*

Excellent.

It reminds me somehow of Anne Elk.

Except her theory was correct.

Massachusetts too.

That's much more reasonable than Seattle's plan. If the number is kept within a certain level, like the tying to inflation they suggested, it won't have as much of an impact.

Everything is tied together you know. To imagine it won't have any impact, or that it will hurt only the targets we hope for and not the ones we don't, is just wishful thinking. We constantly bolt things onto the economic plane for our various reasons and sometimes it's good. Other times the plane no longer has lift and then the entire economic engine may falter. (oh no mixed metaphor!) When there is no economic growth, that hurts the poor most of all.

And we actually want some low wage jobs. Traditionally, things like fast food are called starter jobs. The jobs are easy to do, don't add a ton of value, but wind up teaching people how to hold a job. How to apply, interview, how to get there on time and groomed, how to manage weekly pay, how to orally satisfy your bosses, etc. etc. Not all low wage jobs are taking advantage of people, and if they offer a boost to a better job, that's great. How many of us had a first job in fast food? (raises own hand) It paid shit, right? (nods) But it was good for you? Part of life? And when you realized you didn't want to do this your whole life, that was part of it too? A little motivation to make sure you didn't get stuck there. Exactly. S'a good thing.