I think an interesting way to frame this debate is that somebody who is unable to support the family in even a modest way on their current wage has under-priced their labor. This shouldn't be possible in straight Econ 101, but we are not dealing with a symmetric market. We have large corporations on one side and individual workers on the other. Workers have been able to address this asymmetry by negotiating as unions, but the power of corporations have become so strong as they have merged into multi-nationals that not even regional unions are able to negotiate successfully any longer. Therefore, we the people need to use our sovereign power of the government to address the skewed market and negotiate on behalf of the low wage earners.

@1: the power of corporations have become so strong as they have merged into multi-nationals

The power of corporations to influence policy has grown, but I suggest it's mostly due to the rise of pro-corporate political sentiment among the people, many of whom are earning minimum wage. If the political will were there, our horribly skewed income distribution curves could be fixed quite easily.

P.S. While I support raising the minimum wage, this is merely a half solution, sort of like the Affordable Care Act, and as such, who knows if it will make things better. The money for the raise has to come from somewhere, and ideally that would be the hoards of obscene wealth sitting around in offshore investment accounts.

@2 I think political sentiment comes from asymmetric information. It's not exactly a question of political will.

Good point, @1. It's also true that consolidation in financial, housing, and medical areas in particular has allowed those industries to extract an ever-greater percentage of income.

The financial crisis allowed banks and hedge funds to scoop up millions of homes and rental units at bargain prices, and to bulldoze hundreds of thousands of vacant houses, producing a dizzyingly rapid resurgence in the cost of shelter.

In an article the other day on the disappearance of "free checking," a bank spokesperson made the absurd claim that it cost the bank $360+ annually to provide the "service" of a checking account, by way of softening consumer opinion for the fee hikes to come. But even maintained balances of $5-10 thousand and more have earned minuscule interest (below 1%) for well over ten years now.

No. Somebody who has chosen to have a family while making insufficient money to support them has chosen badly.

And at any rate, like all liberal nonsense, the idea of an astronomically high minimum wage ignores how people behave. For people that hate business so maniacally on the corporate level, you sure seem determined to run any small or mid sized business into bankruptcy with ruinous wages paid to unskilled labor.

Really, how difficult is this? If I sell burgers or books or anything, I pass my expenses on to customers with some kind of margin on which I can live. If you add 60% to one of my expenses my prices go up. So your newly rich burger college dropout burger flipper spends all of their new wage on all the things that cost more.

He or she isn't ahead, in this liberal fantasy. They're even at best. At worst they're out a local job and working at Walmart.

But hey, what do liberal twits understand of basic economics?

@4

Yeah, man! It's all a conspiracy, man! The Man is out to get you, man!

You forgot your medications this morning, didn't you. Go ahead, take them and we'll wait.

Now, isn't reality better than the paranoid delusions that nice psychiatrist is trying to help you overcome?

@5: If you know so much about economics, why don't you ever have cites or even actual examples for anything you ever assert?

I mean, if you were always right about these things, it stands to reason you would have evidence. If increases in the minimum wage causes widespread inflation and job loss, could you please give us an example or a citation that supports you case?

Because I always notice that you never actually prove anything you say, you just repeat it over and over.

@5, that whole argument is such a fallacy. Yes, the labor cost increases and is passed on, but unless labor is 100% of your costs the worker will come out ahead. My business makes widgets that cost 10 simoleans, and my labor cost is 50% of that. Double my labor costs and pass that on to the consumer, and now my widget costs 12.50. My employee who had his wage doubled from 750 simoleans a year now makes 1500 simoleans -- his purchasing power has doubled, and the cost of the widgets has increased 25%. Previously he could buy 75 widgets, now he can buy 120.

@7, it does hurt teens and minorities. Washington State has one of the highest unemployment rates for 16-19 year olds (http://www.governing.com/gov-data/econom…) and one of the highest for Latinos as well (http://www.epi.org/publication/unemploym…).

Think it will get any better when the minimum wage goes to $15 in Seattle? Will any employer chose to hire an unskilled teen or immigrant when they can get hordes of college-educated suburbanites clamoring for the same position?

@8 math fail, widget cost is 15, dude can buy 100. point remains.

@4 it definitely does cost the bank something to provide "free" checking to people who maintain low balances, withdraw $20 at a time from the ATM several times a month and make lots of sub $10 debit card transactions.

@6, you're a little shouty this morning. I think I'll just let that stand in contrast to my relaxed narrative @4, except to observe that anyone who can't see the effects of global consolidation and market manipulation all around him is the one suffering from delusions.

@11, no doubt. But fairly recent survey estimates place the average U.S. checking account balance somewhere between $3000 and $5600. Low-ish, but in the aggregate easily capable of producing sufficient revenue to more than offset costs (which the banks likely overstate).

@12: One would think someone who claims to work in the housing/real estate industry would have at least a passing understanding of such market forces. It is almost like Seattleblues once again knows nothing about a topic he claims to be an expert on. Shocking.

Regarding your point about checking accounts: what makes their claims even more bullshit-ty is that the reason banks are supposed to want people to open accounts is because your money can then be used by the bank for their investments. That is what the bank is getting...all of your money to use. Attaching fees is just a parasitic practice to fuck over customers for just a little bit more.

Know how long I made minimum wage? In my whole working life? About 5 months in high school flipping burgers. That's it. After that anybody with half an ounce of personal ambition can learn some skill that pays- think about this- more than minimum wage. I could do any of several jobs, within and outside of the construction industry, that pay enough to support my family. And for the least of these I'd expect and get 3 times current minimum wage.

What's that? We need to extend unemployment because there are no jobs of any kind anywhere? Weird, because in the worst of the recession I was turning down jobs as I was building my business. And all the skilled carpenters (you know, non union guys that worked rather than bitch about breaks and how they weren't paid to sweep) who were laid off when I was? They stayed busy too. I still turn down 1 or 2 project management offers a year from old contacts in the industry in the middle of this jobless wasteland. So don't bs me about how there any jobs out there. What there are a LOT of is workers with poor work ethic and no desire to actually earn their pay, but there's plenty of jobs for good workers at good pay.

Grow up. Learn a profession or trade. Do your best at it, even when you don't feel like it. And I promise you'll never work minimum wage or lack for employment.

Or you could blame Exxon and BankAmerica and bad luck and whatever other whiny bullshit excuse for YOUR choices. Or for short- be a damn liberal.

@5: When people earn more they often are able to quit second jobs, freeing up marginal employment for unskilled laborers and students. It's an effect we've seen already as a result of Obamacare, since many people worked second jobs just for the health benefits and no longer need to.
OOPS I KNOW MORE THINGS THAN YOU.

@16,
You're a white male who grew up in a middle-ish class family right?

Minorities don't typically get the same fortunate environment you were lucky to have been born into.

It's kinda sorta possible if you don't live in Seattle proper and can get a job close to your home, but it's still by the skin of your teeth. And that's assuming you live near a bus line that can take you to work and have 0 debt.

One trip to the ER or surgery would blow you out of the water for the year though. Even with the ACA.

Long story short, urban centers are becoming places only for the rich.

@15, a little glimpse into the banker's mind here. Lots of assertions to challenge.

Another observation about checking: up until about 10 years ago, a significant part of the air-freight industry was light planes flying bags of canceled checks back and forth between outlying communities and clearinghouses. That has disappeared, along with virtually all of the other cumbersome aspects of actual physical paper checks—except, of course, for that person ahead of us in the grocery line almost every time we shop.

@16: What, construction had work even during the worst of the recession? Don't mean shit. Some industries, such as food, housing, and even entertainment are fairly impervious to recessions, because EVERYONE needs bread and circuses.
Your anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much. For skilled and highly specialized labor (such as I'm qualified for), the market is smaller, more dependent on funding, and subject to tighter regulatory (governmental and organizational) oversight. Check your privilege.

@ 16, leave it to you to credit yourself for what luck and privilege handed to you.

@16: I see you did not bother to find any evidence for any of the assertions you made @5.

So do you have any evidence for those assertions, or the new assertions you made about employment numbers, or the general lack of "ethic" amongst unemployed people @16?

Or do you still lack evidence or even a citation for anything you have said?

@4,

Free checking is pretty much interest-free now. If you want that 1 percent interest, you need a savings account.

@8,

Simoleons? Cute. (I actually mean that; I'm not being sarcastic.)

@9,

Teen unemployment is already ridiculously high across the country. At least with a minimum wage increase, the grown adults doing those jobs will have more purchasing power.

And college-educated adults are not going to be "clamoring" for food service and retail jobs.

@24: May I recommend BECU? Free checking with a Savings Account with a minimum balance of $5... And you get 5% interest on the first $500 in each of the savings and checking account. Wife and I swapped from BoA and have been super happy, almost no hassles (blame Target).

SB: Why is there such high unemployment then? Note that the unemployment number is ONLY people who are actively looking for work for less than 12 months... And it's still really high. Also, why are such a large proportion of jobs minimum wage? You have these talking points, supported by a single piece of anecdotal evidence, yourself, and seem to think that everyone else is just a slacker.

It's obvious BellevueBlues is a child who has made his character from adults around him. He thinks 3* minimum wage is GOOD money. Not just decent, but good enough to brag about. News for you son, that's middle class if two adults are raising kids. It's not enough for a single adult to raise a family, own multiple homes and vacation in Italy.

real and nominal wages

@27

News for you, "son". What I wrote, if you could understand the English language, was that the lowest paid job, were I looking for a job, for which I have saleable skills is about 3x minimum.

However, I'm happy with what i do. We owe no money. We live modestly because doing otherwise seems a waste of good money to me. In short, the idea of racking up debt for cars and vacations and electronics and so on seems pretty stupid to me.

And if someone makes $30 or $35 an hour and can't provide a reasonable lifestyle for a family they're doing it wrong.