Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Sunday, April 27, 2014

15 Now's Class Warriors Vote in Favor of Phased-In Wage Bump for Small Businesses

Posted by on Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 6:01 PM

Screen_Shot_2014-04-27_at_2.10.22_PM.png

Last week, Mayor Ed Murray warned of an "initiative process that quite honestly I believe would end up in a mini-version of class warfare," if dueling minimum wage initiatives are on Seattle-area ballots this fall.

At a 15 Now conference held yesterday at Franklin High School, several hundred participants filled one side of the school gym and Murray's remark became the object of ridicule. The class war began long ago and intensified in recent decades with widening economic inequality, several speakers said (shorter version: capitalism is class war). And it's time us non-oligarchs started fighting back.

Rhetoric aside, the conference felt distinctly mild and banal. 15 Now's supporters calmly voted down, by overwhelming majorities, a series of amendments to its ballot measure that would have transformed it to more of a full-throated, socialist policy platform.

The votes proved that those who depict 15 Now supporters as fanatics allergic to compromise and pragmatism are wrong. 15 Now sounded like the opposite of Occupy—even as speakers, including Kshama Sawant, repeatedly paid homage to the movement. The group voted down amendments that would have:

A) stripped out the 3-year phase in of a wage increase for small businesses and nonprofits

B) narrowed the definition of small businesses

C) added language opposing deportations and prison labor

D) removed exemptions for unionized hotel workers, who said the robust healthcare plans they've negotiated could be threatened by the wage increase (the vote was 186 to 72)

The majorities were so overwhelming for the first three amendments that no count was necessary.

(This seemed to me like an only nominally democratic process. 15 Now's amendment has already been filed with the city clerk, so in effect, they were voting on whether to file a completely new amendment now, which would set them back a few weeks in the signature-gathering process. The prospect of that delay was used as a talking point by speakers against the amendments, which made it feel like the game was rigged against speakers on the other side, though they were given equal time. The moderator expressed a clear bias against the amendments, and the voting process of raised hands was cumbersome.)

Council member Kshama Sawant was a powerful voice for clarity, focus, and strategy. She said the best things you can say to a group of well-meaning, fired-up lefty activists, when arguing for the small business exemption: "We're not going to win this charter amendment with the people who are here. We need to build this movement. We're trying to win some of the people on our side who want the fear mongering addressed." In her closing speech, she told them, "You haven't done your job [organizing for 15 Now] if you're only talking to people you agree with."

At the same time, she pointed out that the city's Income Inequality Advisory Committee, made up of business owners and advocates like her, was never likely to arrive at a singular agreement of the kind sought by Mayor Murray—an agreement the mayor has said he wants backed by a "supermajority" of committee members. "We have a supermajority in Seattle," Sawant said, "70% of Seattle wants a strong $15."

She took OneSeattle's poll purportedly showing a dip in support and turned it around: "There's a little bit of red baiting there [in the poll question]," she said. "And yet, if 50% of Seattle agrees with it, I take that as a vote of confidence."

The committee's current proposal—which Anna revealed here—"is a Christmas list for big business," Sawant declared. It includes a 3-4 year phase-in for big business, "which means while the CEOs of Starbucks, McDonald's and so on are making an average of $9,000 an hour, they get another three or four years to keep those workers in poverty." She offered a reminder that those companies are represented on the committee by the Chamber of Commerce.

Given the inclusion of tip and healthcare credits, 5-7 year phase-ins for small businesses, and no built-in cost of living adjustments, "It's not a deal that works for us," she said. "It's a crappy deal." She said the committee never seriously considered her proposal, which mirrors 15 Now's.

In the end, the conference approved 15 Now's existing charter amendment, for which they need to gather a minimum of 30,000 signatures between May 24 and roughly mid-July. I imagine they won't have any trouble exceeding that figure. When an organizer asked who's up for gathering 100 signatures per week, a few dozen hands shot up.

Former Stranger writer David Goldstein, by the way, killed it with a rousing speech on how to get under the skin of your political enemies (Tim Eyman featured prominently) that had the crowd in stitches. Here he is, voting along with Sawant:

Screen_Shot_2014-04-27_at_4.33.22_PM.png

Waaaaait a second... is the firebrand socialist holding a Starbucks iced coffee in her right hand? Man, what a sell-out!

 

Comments (95) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
200 morons at a high school rally? Murray has them by their balls.
Posted by No Teasin' Just Pleasin' on April 27, 2014 at 6:28 PM · Report this
2
Ansel, I know that your last lines were meant to diffuse criticism of Council member Sawant drinking a Starbuck's drink. But, really, Council member Sawant drinking a Starbuck's coffee? Pretty bougie... Walk the walk. Plenty of indie coffee places available in Seattle.
Posted by M. Wells on April 27, 2014 at 6:44 PM · Report this
3
Starbucks CEO speaks out against $15 minimum wage:
http://www.kplu.org/post/starbucks-ceo-s…
Posted by spock on April 27, 2014 at 7:11 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 4
This piece seems to have the intention of giving hope to the 15now movement, but in fact strengthens my suspicions that 15now is losing steam, especially as people are beginning to hear how comes this issue is AND how extreme Sawant and her political allies are. Red baiting?she is an unapologetic socialist. And most Seattle residents despite their desire to help those in need are not. Period!
Posted by melvidaloca on April 27, 2014 at 7:27 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 5
@4

Exactly. If a majority of Seattle voters could stomach an unapologetic socialist, Sawant would have defeated Richard Conlin! And yet here he is, right in his same old City Council seat he's held in since forever.

Right Richard? Richard...?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on April 27, 2014 at 7:32 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 6
@5 It's called radicalizing the student population of seattle. That's how she won.
Posted by melvidaloca on April 27, 2014 at 7:42 PM · Report this
passionate_jus 7
@6

student population of Seattle? There's that many students in Seattle?

Man, you're funny! Thanks for the laughs.
Posted by passionate_jus on April 27, 2014 at 7:56 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 8
It's really funny how sour Sawant supporters get when they realize just maybe they will have to compromise. Because most of us are willing. To compromise.
Posted by melvidaloca on April 27, 2014 at 8:03 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 9
And yes @6, it is possible to tip the vote using young college students. They are idealistic, and have time on their hands to protest, organize, solicit, demonstrate. They're doing it right now at SCCC. Glad I was able to amuse you though.
Posted by melvidaloca on April 27, 2014 at 8:10 PM · Report this
JonnoN 10
@8 how interesting, please tell us more
Posted by JonnoN http://www.backnine.org/ on April 27, 2014 at 8:10 PM · Report this
11
@8 ok I'll bite, what is your compromise?
Posted by Machiavelli was framed on April 27, 2014 at 8:11 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 12
@9

OK. Fine. Sounds like a plan to me.

If "tipping the vote" with college voters were in any way illegitimate, then where is Richard Conlin? Why isn't he in office any more? A win's a win.

And if Sawant has a winning strategy, then she'll keep winning. The same tactics will be used to pass Charter Amendment 20.

And that's only granting your fantasy version of events. When you factor in, you know, "reality", then 15Now has an even broader coalition of Seattle voters to count on, besides students (who don't count why, exactly?): 120,000 minimum wage workers, their families, union members, their families, anyone who has looked at the history of minimum wage increases, anyone who trusts the opinions of Labor Secretary Robert Reich, etc. etc. etc.

But even in your alternate reality, it's looking good for Yes on 20.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on April 27, 2014 at 8:21 PM · Report this
13
Sawant's just taking after Anna now.
https://twitter.com/minardanna/status/45…
Posted by ChefJoe on April 27, 2014 at 8:23 PM · Report this
14
Goldy must be happy he doesn't have to file his stories from up Sawant's ass anymore. Now he just sits on her lap.
Posted by Mercer Island Goy on April 27, 2014 at 8:37 PM · Report this
15
I don't like Murray's plan at all. I think that the original $15 tomorrow, no help for small business proposal was a bit ambitious, but Murray's is the most watered down useless plan Ive heard so far. Sure, if you invite over a ton of tycoons, and don't actually invite a single low wage worker onto your committee, you're going to get a plan that tycoons like. But is it helping people? No.
Im excited to vote for this and help out my neighbors.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 8:39 PM · Report this
16
Murray tipped his hand pretty brazenly by using the term "class warfare." The is a term used by the right and GOP to attack anything that might inhibit the rich getting richer in any way. He just isn't doing anything to disprove the notion that he is a willing tool.
Posted by cracked on April 27, 2014 at 8:51 PM · Report this
17
@16 After promising to advance the $15/hr minimum, he comes out brazenly red-baiting the whole project.

Posted by cracked on April 27, 2014 at 8:53 PM · Report this
18
the chances of perpetual losers like Cthulhu getting raise to $15 an hour are getting less and less..
Posted by do you feel it slipping away? on April 27, 2014 at 9:08 PM · Report this
19
@15: "I think that the original $15 tomorrow, no help for small business proposal was a bit ambitious". Boy, maintaining this list of traitors to the cause is getting a little tedious. Can someone hold my torch while I write down this guys address?
Posted by derpyderpington on April 27, 2014 at 9:10 PM · Report this
melvidaloca 20
@11 There are plenty of compromises on the table. Top credits, compensation packages, phase-ins, tiers for smaller businesses. All of which Sawant opposes because she is backed by national labor unions.
Posted by melvidaloca on April 27, 2014 at 9:12 PM · Report this
21
Ms. Sawant is the most politically astute elected person in Seattle right now. She can run circles around her colleagues on the council. The least politically astute person in Seattle, after the execrable Michael Wells is probably Ed Murray. What a sad sack he is.
Posted by Pol Pot on April 27, 2014 at 9:12 PM · Report this
22
@19
I live in the Market, and arson? Cool dude.

Whats your point anyway? Do you want to burn my place down, or are you just trying to paint people who support raising the minimum wage as revolutionary arsonists?

I was happy that Sawant didn't budge right away because that would be crap negotiating. I'm happy that the ballot measure is more palatable for small employers. I'm happy to vote for it in November. I don't like the mayors proposal because it does too little, takes too long, and makes too many concessions to huge businesses with massive profit margins. I'm against burning buildings. Go figure.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:18 PM · Report this
23
@20
Those aren't compromises. Those are just concessions. A compromise is where one side gives up something, and then the other side gives up something. What is business giving up with any of those proposals?

If you think those are compromises, I've got a great compromise for you. Mail me $20.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:20 PM · Report this
24
@21 Say it a few more times you may even convince yourself. If she's so powerful how come she can only muster 200 morons on a SATURDAY?
Posted by Limousine Liberals on April 27, 2014 at 9:21 PM · Report this
25
@24
I was at the Sounders game. For one. I'll vote for it, but that doesn't mean that I'll skip a Sounders game to sit in a high school. The game was incredible, FYI. Hope you were there.

On the other hand, when was the last time a city council person was able to call a gathering of a few hundred volunteers to a meeting on a beautiful saturday? For a ballot initiative, that is a really big crew of volunteers.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:30 PM · Report this
Reverse Polarity 26
melvidaloca, by almost any measure, I'm not a radical at all, nor am I a socialist. I sympathize with small businesses and non-profits. But I have more sympathies for people trying to get by on minimum wage. In a perfect world, I'd love to see $15 instituted across the board on January 1st, but I'm quite willing to make some compromises to see the poorest workers catch up a little. I short phase in seems reasonable. Maybe some other minor tweaks.

The plan leaked on Friday, however, is all compromise. It is so watered down as to be almost completely useless. A 7 year phase in, plus credits for tips AND health plans, plus no COL increases until the phase in finishes, plus an overly generous description of "small" business? Even modest inflation will eat up half of that raise before it is implemented for most workers.

The $15Now plan includes a compromise of a phase in for small businesses. That seems completely reasonable to me.

If the committee or the council can come up with something close to the 15Now plan, I'm good with that. But if they stick with Friday's leaked plan, I'll vote for the referendum.
Posted by Reverse Polarity on April 27, 2014 at 9:31 PM · Report this
seatackled 27
Tee hee. Trollie thinks "If you don't like heads I win, how about tails you lose?" is a compromise.
Posted by seatackled on April 27, 2014 at 9:36 PM · Report this
28
@22: probably no point at all. Actually I think my take away on this issue is that I've spent too much time on Slog reading garbage thoughts from garbage people and now I don't know what to think on this issue. I started out supporting the 15/now and Sawant, but there has been so much churn (and I admit I feel this way because I read Slog comments), that now I feel like it's a farce.

Fuckit, I don't know what to think any more. Time to take a break from the internet I guess.
Posted by derpyderpington on April 27, 2014 at 9:37 PM · Report this
29
@28
Fair enough. Mental health days are usually the right move. Feel better!
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:40 PM · Report this
30
@25, it wasn't Sawant's meeting. It was a national conference of min wage raisers. Kind of like when We Day was held at KeyArena with 15,000 mostly-kids... it wasn't a meeting of the Edward Norton fan club.
Posted by ChefJoe on April 27, 2014 at 9:42 PM · Report this
31
@20 I asked, what is YOUR compromise. Not for a vague reference to someone else.

YOUR compromise, in YOUR words. You speaking what you believe not hiding behind some smoke. What is YOUR solution?
Posted by Machiavelli was framed on April 27, 2014 at 9:44 PM · Report this
32
@30
That's one way to look at it. I really doubt that lots of people flew in for this. The minimum wage earning crowd doesn't have the reputation for being able to just call in a vacation day and fly to Seattle.

This struck me as a rally for the campaign that's about to happen to move a ballot measure forward. If you don't want to give Sawant any credit for the event, no skin off my back. I don't really get why you feel that way though.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:52 PM · Report this
33
@31
I dont know that that is fair. No one asks you to totally re-frame what you want when you say "$15". The problem is that those proposals are being billed as "compromises", when they are really "concessions".

They amount to "Ask for less, we'd like that!". They don't offer anything to the other side of the table.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 27, 2014 at 9:55 PM · Report this
34
@32, goldy made it sound like the event to be at.

http://horsesass.org/15-now-national-con…
I know a lot of establishment folks are rolling their eyes at the notion that 15Now.org is holding a national conference in Seattle today. Arrogantly overambitious, amiright?

But it turns out, that’s exactly what this is. Among the 300-plus attendees who have already arrived for the morning plenary session are vocal contingents from Boston, NYC, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Minneapolis, LA, Oakland, and other cities scattered throughout the US. It really is a national conference.


But, really, it's got an odd connection to SA in that pictures of the event have people wearing blue shirts from SA meetings and they even had a workshop called.

Inequality, Capitalism and the Socialist Alternative
https://www.15now.org/april-26/

But, hey, I'm learning something... apparently Kshama still had $10k worth of debt to pay off and Ms Spear has a big shit-eating grin.
http://www.socialistalternative.org/2014…
Posted by ChefJoe on April 27, 2014 at 10:07 PM · Report this
35
@33 compromise, concession, whatever... I am just asking
melvidaloca what his/her offer is. Negotiation, offer, counter offer. What's the offer?
Posted by Machiavelli was framed on April 27, 2014 at 10:07 PM · Report this
36
@21 from Merriam-Wesbster.com

sad sack
noun
: a person who is not successful or able to do things well : an inept person who causes feelings of pity or disgust in other people
Posted by cracked on April 27, 2014 at 10:14 PM · Report this
37
@36, that's Murray. I'm definitely disgusted with his performance as Mayor so far, and since that performance is so inept, I doubt if he's going to be able to be successful in doing things well in the next almost-4 years.

However, I have no pity for him. He's been making a bit more than $15/hour for some years, and certainly more than whatever pittance would end up being paid to hourly workers under his plan.
Posted by sarah70 on April 28, 2014 at 12:18 AM · Report this
38
@21 Execrable. Well, well, someone is using their dictionary. Such a big word for such a tiny mind.
Posted by M. Wells on April 28, 2014 at 12:22 AM · Report this
39
21

We have a Winner!

but then, Seattle is the Special Olympics of politics....
Posted by trophies for all on April 28, 2014 at 6:38 AM · Report this
fletc3her 40
@21 Yes! It's exciting to watch someone play hardball. We see it on the right often enough, but the left is usually out there playing tee-ball.
Posted by fletc3her on April 28, 2014 at 7:24 AM · Report this
41
Why the fuck would I help pay for Sawant's campaign debt? She earns almost $120,000. Yes, yes, I know she said she's only keeping 40 of that, but the city still pays her the whole damn amount. Why the hell does she want more?
Posted by wait on April 28, 2014 at 8:31 AM · Report this
Hernandez 42
@2/3 - the people who made that iced coffee, rang her up at the register, and clean the store she bought it from are all allies in this fight. This is not about boycotting businesses whose upper management opposes $15/hour. All of the minimum wage workers at the big companies like Starbucks, Subway, Target, OfficeMax, etc. are allies. This is about helping working people, not punishing large corporations.
Posted by Hernandez http://hernandezlist.blogspot.com on April 28, 2014 at 8:32 AM · Report this
43
having been at the meeting, and having been at dozens and dozens of other political meetings in seattle for over twenty years, this was the best one ever. a huge crowd of folks are revving up to change the city charter to put in a $15 min wage; they plan to hit the streets with 1,000 signature gathering volunteers to amass 50,000 signatures; if they do it we can vote for a 61% raise for 100,000 people, boosting the local economy and reducing inequality and btw abolishing poverty wages in our fair city some few weeks after we vote in the fall ie on January 1, 2015. with big business paying 15 now, ie, 1/1/15 right after the vote in November.

iow, these people are DOING SOMETHING not just talking the way democrats talk. they're using people power not the money power that empowers the donators and capitalists the mayor listens to, too much. it's using legal rights and your own power to put the debate into a forum -- a popular vote -- where the people voting simply are not bought off by the high dollar donors the way the city council is.

and yes along the way you compromise; on the phase in; and on the definition of not so large business; things like that. of course you do. and of course you don't put in a MW for prisoners! don't be ridiculous. that kind of thing would mean the whole thing would not pass in the fall.

yes to using your legal rights, yes to standing up and doing something without asking permission of big business, yes to democratic process (while the author claims this wasn't, that's bull, all votes were open, reporters attended -- unlike the mayor's committee! which is in place simply to empower the 1%) and the pathway is now set. the whole occupy now 15 now then vote sawant movement should get the gold start for effective politics! they're doing more for the working and middle class than ANY state legislator has done for 20 years. they're doing more than the entire democratic party has done for about 40 years -- while we let the real MW be cut since 1968 only a few times did democrats put the MW on the agenda or increase it. we did it in Washington state sure, but even our MW today is LESS THAN THE 1968 FED MW ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. iow the ENTIRE political class has totally FAILED TO HELP MIDDLE AND WORKING CLASS for decades so screw them now we use real people power, our legal right to vote on the charter and put in a real $15 MW there adjusted for inflation which the corrupt council and mayor too heaviliy influenced by MONEY POWER can't change. seriously, you call this undemocratic but the normal channels are so dominated by two neighborhoods of money -- look at the SEEC pie charts -- the politicians listen to two neighborhoods called downtown plus outside of seattle ie total 1%ers, capitalist masters, property owners, developers and their servant lawyers, engineers, bond traders, etc. that process is what is NOT democratic. this process is democratic to the core: we will all get to vote on this in November. this is a left movement of world historical significance and yes, abougt 40% of the crowd was from somewhere else including the head of the English and wales socialist party with ties to many socialist parties across the world -- we in seattle are the spearpoint for CHANING THE INEQUAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM thanks to these people who got sawant in and are now fulfilling her promise to get us $15 an hour.

since we know the council won't.
More...
Posted by large raise for 100K on April 28, 2014 at 8:45 AM · Report this
44
@42 makes sense.
Posted by spock on April 28, 2014 at 8:54 AM · Report this
guerre 45
@34 There was a national conference for SA/CWI on Sunday, and that is what drew in so many activists from across the country. As someone in attendance, I want to say 40-80 people came from across the country(there are 408 members total). We have a travel fund some of us pay into to help our less well off members attend. 15Now is a coalition lead by SA, though several other organizations are members, so of course there were lots of us in attendance. A $15 minimum wage is our signature issue, given what we understand to be an issue that resonates(as that poll with 68% demonstrates). As to the campaign debt(which was $40k originally) that was paid off by Saturday. Spear may have a goofy smile in your opinion, but what bearing does that have on her activism?
Posted by guerre on April 28, 2014 at 10:04 AM · Report this
46
Excuses does not a leader make, but spin is what I expected. Railing against Starbucks but then drinking it? When such obvious hypocrisy is spun as the act being a necessity...now, THAT is a professional act of being in politics!

And, as for this remarkable passive dishonesty in another post by Sawant's right-hand man, "If you have data that can reinforce the fear of small businesses going under, can you please provide links to those studies? I have only seen studies that show the opposite." - no, there is no "data", there are no "studies" because nothing like this has EVER BEEN DONE BEFORE, but there IS the word of dozens and dozens of small businesses and non-profits.

Like any true believer, this movement and Sawant don't care about facts, reason and logic - all they care about is the movement and then will find any fantastical rationalizations to assuage whatever is in you that for the rest of us is called 'guilt'.

Many small businesses will close if this goes through - even with this remarkably dumb sunset clause suggested by the mayor. That's a guarantee. But, Sawant and the $15Now cadre don't care.

Just be honest. It feels SO GOOD to be honest. Why not show the integrity of honesty and be out and proud that Sawant and the $15 Now followers simply don't care about small businesses and/or their employees, and that these followers are being manipulated are all for the greater good.

Just admit it. It's SOOOO good-feeing, being honest.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 12:22 PM · Report this
47
melvidaloca - "@11 There are plenty of compromises on the table. Top credits, compensation packages, phase-ins, tiers for smaller businesses. All of which Sawant opposes because she is backed by national labor unions."

While generally I agree with you, it's not "because she is backed by national labor unions" that she won't compromise in any meaningful way, it's because she's trying to lead a movement and is looking to take her Socialist dreamweaving to a higher office for herself and those in her cadre.

She's talked to many, many small businesspeople, each of whom she has heard will close if she goes through with this and her only response is inane suggestions that show that she does not understand small business and sad talking points that SURELY shows that she does not understand small business.

Or, she does not care. That's an option, also.

So, she's either ignorant of the reality for small businesses or dishonestly making excuses for how it'd work.

Either way...now, THAT is a politician!
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 12:34 PM · Report this
48
@23, JonCracolici - "What is business giving up with any of those proposals?"

Jon, "business" has over and over again offered to move to a higher minimum wage as long as there are the carveouts that make staying operational possible. Also, "business" has offered, has proposed that 'small businesses' find some exemptions while larger businesses do not get the exemptions.

There's not ONE business group that is against raising the minimum wage because they want to compromise. TRULY compromise.

Sawant and her cadre don't want to compromise, and anyone that thinks that her "compromise" is really such a thing does not understand negotiations. She meant to go there the whole time, so an ACTUAL compromise means ACTUALLY moving.

Small business moved. She just manipulated and many simply don't understand that.

Either be interested in learning the facts and be honest about what is so important to small businesses in terms of what is possible, or be ignorant or dishonest and blindly follow Sawant.

Me? I'll take honesty.

Small businesses have been honest this whole process. We'll go out of business if this goes through, but Goldy and the rest of the ideologues simply want what they want and want a phyrric victory. That's their life's mission, for all of us to lose by winning.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM · Report this
49
@45: I'm glad to hear that Sawant's debt was paid off, but it is SHAMEFUL that a person with a six figure salary who CLAIMS to be "for the people" would ask those very low wage workers to pay even one fucking penny of her debt. SHAMEFUL.
Posted by wait on April 28, 2014 at 1:00 PM · Report this
50
@48

I think you're confusing "honesty" with "truthiness".
Posted by Bloated Jesus is Bloated on April 28, 2014 at 1:45 PM · Report this
51
@48
I'm sorry, but I don't think I follow you. Are you saying that business organizations would agree to a $17(inreal$) minimum wage if it was phased in? I feel like it is you, and not her, who doesn't understand the difference between a compromise and a concession.

If I say, "i want to do this", and you say "well, that really bothers me, how about you only do half of what you want?" and I say, "ok sure buddy", that is a concession. Not a compromise. A compromise would be you saying "well, that really bugs me, so in exchange for doing half of what you want, I'll help you do this other thing." There's a really big difference.

And if Murray's proposal is real, you're second sentence isn't true. Big business would be getting carve-outs, just different ones than small business.

Trying to frame this debate as one of "learning facts and honesty" versus "ignorance, dishonesty and blindness" is a pretty obvious manipulation. Which makes me wonder what side of that divide you're on. In general.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 2:09 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 52
@46

Yeah, we have done this before. We had I-518 in 1988. Raised the wages of tipped workers by 85%. Restaurants did fine. This is a smaller increase, spread over a longer span of time.

You lied in your Stranger article, Friedman. Remember? You claimed you were giving us "real" numbers from your restaurant, but then you had to admit you made them up "for the sake of argument". For the sake of winning an argument in spite of the facts.

You're a liar, dude. You come here and lie every day. Everyone knows because we caught you lying.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on April 28, 2014 at 2:34 PM · Report this
53
Cthulu stop typing and mow my lawn like you promised.
Its good to see your still up to the same slander and rhetoric on this issue from the first time I jumped on this message board.

Each of your points has been disputed and corrected. 1-518 caused job loss & followup inflation. Sante Fe( 85%) increase was due to being well below market rate and the MW increase brought it to market.

Here is the reality simply put. There has never been an increase of this magnitude to the MW when a city/ordinance is already near or at the top of the wage market. Given that I have directly talked to Univ. Cal-berkley professor who presented this study and he agreed with me, I will not concede any of your misguided "facts".

All along I have voiced that a longer term phase-out was in the works, that total comp was a sticking point. Its convenient how the 15now supporters such as Cthulu have now come to the current reality which is "15later" and "watered down". A far cry from your 68% straw poll and...you know the infamous internal "Iver's poll" which is a farce.

It will be refreshing to see logic prevail and Seattle rebuke the socialist hypocrisy in November!! Now que the Mitt Romney & Sarah Palin republican fear mongering.right Cthulu..right? maybe not. Now go shop on Amazon .
Posted by A real live employer on April 28, 2014 at 3:06 PM · Report this
54
your= you're
Posted by A real live employer on April 28, 2014 at 3:08 PM · Report this
55
@5
And yet here he is, right in his same old City Council seat he's held in since forever.

Right Richard? Richard...?


I didn't vote FOR a socialist. I voted AGAINST Conlin.

I think you'll find that theme echoed with the majority of voters who elected Sawant.

She knows this.

If she didn't she'd still be doing those silly delusional OCCUPY speeches about "collectivizing" Amazon, Microsoft, Boeing and Google. But she's not.
Posted by tkc on April 28, 2014 at 3:25 PM · Report this
56
#44, " @42 makes sense."

Does it? Well, what about all the $15 Now cadre's calls for boycotting small businesses that try to talk about facts - facts that are ignored by 100% of the $15 Now movement?
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 3:53 PM · Report this
57
@56
Im part of the $15 Now movement in that I will vote for it. What facts am I ignoring? Convince me.

Ps. What boycott? Who's boycotting? Has there ever been a boycott against people who like facts? What?
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 4:10 PM · Report this
58
#26, 'Reverse Polarity', " The $15Now plan includes a compromise of a phase in for small businesses. That seems completely reasonable to me."

Except that the reason for a compromise is because any of these actions would force the closures of small businesses. This 3yr "compromise" would only cause up to 3 years to close businesses.

If a reason for compromise is to allow for all sides to exist and move forward successfully in the future, then the realities of small business have to be considered. We should not be called 'liars' when we give our numbers that show that many will be out of business, even if we had 3-7 years to figure out how to raise our prices enough to equalize our new costs, none of us seem to be able to figure out exactly how to do that. So, your "compromise" needs to take into consideration reality - and so far, there ain't no reality to the demands on Small Biz.

So, either believe us when we say that we'd be in trouble if this went through, or call us liars. But, if you care to believe us at all, then you'll see that a compromise needs to exist that allow us to continue to exist.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:20 PM · Report this
59
@58"Except that the reason for a compromise is because any of these actions would force the closures of small businesses. This 3yr "compromise" would only cause up to 3 years to close businesses. "
I dont understand what this means. "would cause up to 3 years to close businesses."?

You keep mentioning a compromise. What are you suggesting that small business give workers in exchange for a longer phase in?
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 4:26 PM · Report this
60
#48, Jon, "Are you saying that business organizations would agree to a $17(inreal$) minimum wage if it was phased in? I feel like it is you, and not her, who doesn't understand the difference between a compromise and a concession."

No. I won't get into a silly, childish semantic argument with you. Our compromise/concession - whatever you want to call it is that we are more than happy to work on moving up the minimum wage as long as we can simply still remain in business. I don't care to get into a silly, childish semantic argument about what you want to define as "compromise" or "concession". I want to remain in business and I want to be able to provide very good jobs for my 20+ employees, some who make over $40/hr.

You can win the battle and win the war, or you can stop with the silly semantics and work with me to find a REAL middle ground.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:40 PM · Report this
61
#48, Jon, "Are you saying that business organizations would agree to a $17(inreal$) minimum wage if it was phased in? I feel like it is you, and not her, who doesn't understand the difference between a compromise and a concession."

No. I won't get into a silly, childish semantic argument with you. Our compromise/concession - whatever you want to call it is that we are more than happy to work on moving up the minimum wage as long as we can simply still remain in business. I don't care to get into a silly, childish semantic argument about what you want to define as "compromise" or "concession". I want to remain in business and I want to be able to provide very good jobs for my 20+ employees, some who make over $40/hr.

You can win the battle and lose the war, or, you can stop with the silly semantics and work with me to find a REAL middle ground.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:40 PM · Report this
62
"You lied in your Stranger article, Friedman. Remember? You claimed you were giving us "real" numbers from your restaurant, but then you had to admit you made them up "for the sake of argument". For the sake of winning an argument in spite of the facts."

Still spilling that canard, 'eh? Your ignorance of the issue not only shows with every biased post, but that what I wrote was that my numbers were a baseline, and - if you were honest - you'd mention that I also wrote that the "real" numbers would be MORE, so I actually did myself a detriment by not INCLUDING my assumed increases in payroll. What I did, and what I stated was that I took the numbers as they are - as they are on my books - but NOT with the additional wages that I'd have to pay as I have to raise the wages for those that are already at or near $15/hr., because I did not want to include any numbers besides what I could 100% prove.

So, you keep up with this dishonest ballox. I'd not expect anything less of you.

Hey, you're Goldy, right? Is that true? Why do you hide behind this alt?
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:46 PM · Report this
63
@60,61
Well the ad hom attacks really brighten my day, so thanks. By the way, just because I brought up that you are using your words inaccurately doesn't make that point childish. It would be childish if I did it just to bother you. But I do it because those terms can be misused intentionally in order to portray the other side as unreasonable. Which is exactly the position you take, over and over, using very emotionally charged language. So there's a good reason to bring up that you are not saying what you mean.

Also, there is no argument, a compromise is not a concession. A compromise is EACH SIDE agreeing to limited concessions. Its not "what I want to call it", it is what it is. Whats your concession, which would make this proposal a compromise?
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 4:54 PM · Report this
64
#56 Jon, "What facts am I ignoring? Convince me."

Jon, I don't blame you for not hearing the loud chorus of small businesses that over and over again say that they'll be out of business or at the very least be put at a huge & job-killing competitive disadvantage if this goes through. I have given my numbers over and over, so have the owners of many businesses, including those from Poquito's, Tom Douglas & Howard Shultz. All of our numbers and opinions match up, so either we're all lying or ...

Again, at $15, that represents a 60+% increase in our payroll, which to me represents an 18% TCOGS, which means that between that and the rise in my purveyor's costs which they say will be ~10%, that represents a 6% rise in my TCOGS, which means that I will have to raise my prices by no less than 24% before I make one penny in profit.

So, I don't know how to convince you past that. Many, many other small businesses have mirrored my numbers, so it's not like there's any question of the veracity of our statements on this one. Or, we're all lying.

"Ps. What boycott? Who's boycotting? Has there ever been a boycott against people who like facts? What?"

Every time one of these threads goes up, some on the $15 Now side talk about boycotting the businesses that try to include some reality to this fantasyland-dreamfest.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:54 PM · Report this
65
#59, Jon - " I dont understand what this means. "would cause up to 3 years to close businesses."?

There is no compromise that would stop us from going out of business if there's no Total Compensation carveout. So, whether a rise in MW to $15 happens today or in 3 years, it will achieve the same results. Maybe in 3 years, some will be able to figure out how to deal with the competitive advantage/disadvantage that they have naturally as part of their daily commerce, but most small businesses simply can't increase their costs or make the kinds of cuts to allow them to stay in business.

So, that comment simply means that it's not a compromise to allow us three additional years to go out of business.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 4:59 PM · Report this
66
#59, Jon, "What are you suggesting that small business give workers in exchange for a longer phase in?"

We ask for a Total Compensation carveout, so we are agreeing to work with those that want to increase the MW, but give us what we need to simply stay in business and continue to employ people. That's our compromise. That means that my coworkers, the bartenders and servers that make upwards or over $40/hr. can have calculated in their MW these tips.

And, why not allow small biz to have these carveouts, but limit it to JUST big biz? Let the big businesses pay $15 immediately, which will give small biz a real competitive advantage against them. Otherwise, all you're doing is making big biz laugh at you as you HELP them put us at a competitive disadvangage, which means that AFTER you saddle us with these higher payrolls & other costs, now we have to compete with larger businesses who can take the rise in MW an move it around their COGS and beat us in the pricing game.

Surely that make sense, right?
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 5:06 PM · Report this
67
#63 - Jon, "Which is exactly the position you take, over and over, using very emotionally charged language. So there's a good reason to bring up that you are not saying what you mean."

Not to get into a side debate and squander a good discussion, but you are saying that MY statements are "emotionally charged language", but Sawant's governance-by-sloganeering is not? Come on...

Yes, this is an emotional issue. It's people's jobs, people's businesses and people's future. But, when one's bias becomes more important than their goals, that's a problem.

So, the numbers are there. In black and white. You can now either choose to believe us or not - we can't do more to convince you. When so many small business people have confirmed the numbers, either believe them or don't. If it seems emotional to you, that's because it is.
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 5:10 PM · Report this
68
@Im Cool
None of those things in 64 are facts. Sorry to be pendantic, but they aren't. Thats you and others predicting the same thing. Its not even a well done poll though. Its not a through audit. Its not a peer reviewed study of economic impacts of the min wage. Its just an opinion you share with others, not a fact. If you look at the data points in a peer reviewed study, those are facts. Try the CBO report. Its pretty interesting. I know you think its lame that I'm taking you to task for using words incorrectly, but you are using those words to make arguments that don't really mean what you say they mean. You say "everyone is ignoring the facts!", and then the facts you believe people are ignoring turn out to not be facts.

I don't find your argument convincing. And the reason is this: You are basically making the argument that unless you are allowed to pay people very little, your business has no chance of surviving. In summation, its "Ill pay my employees a pittance, but my business is special so we as a city should ensure its survival." That's not very compelling to me.

Total compensation is a terrible idea(my opinion), because it allows health care to be considered compensation. So if healthcare costs go up(they will), employees will have their wages garnished.

and @65 You meant to use the word "concession" again. If you don't offer something, and just want something, that's a concession from the other party. I don't understand why you keep using the word compromise inappropriately.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 5:18 PM · Report this
69
"CHANING THE INEQUAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM"

Learning to write might be a good way to help you get ahead. But go ahead, try and vote yourself a free pony.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Goldenstienemberg on April 28, 2014 at 5:22 PM · Report this
70
@67
My issue with your use of emotionally charged language is that you are using it as a way to demonize people who disagree with you and portray them as unreasonable. While understandable, it doesn't make your case.

"So, the numbers are there. In black and white. You can now either choose to believe us or not - "
As far as I know, the numbers aren't "there". What numbers? Are you referring to a peer-reviewed study that supports your point? Can you refer me to it?
Or are those numbers the ones that you see as a business owner, but others don't get to, and have to take your word for it. I don't know why I would take anyone at there word when there is such an obvious conflict of interest, and I don't know them intimately.

"Honestly Mr. Auditor, I paid all my taxes. Sorry, but my books are closed. You'll just have to take my word for it. Or do you think I'm a liar!?!"
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 5:29 PM · Report this
71
On the coffee thing, honestly, unless it involves crossing a picket line, who cares? The whole buy-here, don't-buy-here approach to solving poor corporate behavior is proving to be pointless. Keeping all the boycotts and buycotts straight can lead to headaches. We have a democratic (at least in name) government. We should use it.
Posted by BookEmDano on April 28, 2014 at 5:46 PM · Report this
72
#68, Jon, "None of those things in 64 are facts.

See? There it is. I say it's a fact because it's taken straight off of my spreadsheets, every other small businessperson that has used their own numbers...but...they're not facts.

Yes, yes they are. Have we opened up all of our books to independent audit? Of course not. A) No one has asked for nor offered to pay for that, and b) no one would agree to that.

Thus! My point over and over and over again. You can either believe us or not. We don't care because we know that those that have an open mind will not call us or assume us liars. You are holding out because of your bias. You have a bias and I assume personal integrity that says that if you know something to be true, then you have to admit it. But, since there's no independent audit - only the word of so many businessespeople, then you can ignore it. You can cast aspersions. That's what your bias allows you to do and still feel the integrity of your self.

Me? I am open to all information without demanding inane levels of process.

You are basically making the argument that unless you are allowed to pay people very little, your business has no chance of surviving.

"very little"? Really? What you don't understand about business is that this "very little" is what we currently have, and unless we are able to move our business along with the rising costs, then, yes, my "usiness has no chance of surviving." See, the difference between us is that I deal with reality, and you are playing in some sandbox game of semantics and debate. You're having fun trying to find some holes in what you perceive as my points. I've taken debate courses, I could do this also. but, I have an integrity that says that I will be 100% honest, I will continue to not play games and I will do all that I can to stop those that don't know enough to know enough to not ruin our economy and our community.

"Total compensation is a terrible idea(my opinion), because it allows health care to be considered compensation."

Except that the KINDS of carveouts can be negotiated. What if it was limited to JUST tips - an option that many small businesses have suggested. What would you say to that? Would that still trip your bias-meter?

"I don't understand why you keep using the word compromise inappropriately.

I don't. You just want to play semantics. I'm not going to diagram this one for you.

Liss'n. You can believe me or not. It's your choice. We are right. We WILL go out of business if your bias leads you to make this agenda-burdened decision. Then, ya'll will say what? What will you say to the many people out of work? The non-profits that can't raise the money that they need to house, to feed to help those that need the assistance? What about the non-tip/commission-based businesses that won't have any chance of a carve-out? The book stores, the shoe stores, the art & pet supply stores? What will you say to them when they have to raise their prices and lay people off just to hope to now compete at what will be a very serious competitive disadvantage to the larger and/or out-of-state businesses?

What'll you say to them? Will you start another semantic argument with them?

Think, Jon. We're not wrong, and we're not lying.
More...
Posted by I'm Cool on April 28, 2014 at 5:59 PM · Report this
73
@72
Ive got a giant tiger living in my basement. Its a fact, and no you can't see it.

I know the above is silly, but its kind of what you're doing. I haven't called you a liar, ever. I'm not casting aspersions, as you claim I have. But you are claiming to have access to reliable information that you are using to PREDICT THE FUTURE, and then saying that no one else can look at the data, and that everyone should just trust you. I don't have some crazy bias, I just don't take people who have something at stake at their word when they won't provide supporting evidence. Call me crazy.

There actually is data out there about the effects of raising the minimum wage. It doesn't paint the dire picture of the future that you do. If you want people to believe you, argue using the data out there, not using the data you keep hidden. Bring back those debate skills. Use supporting arguments and evidence. Don't rely on "are you calling me a liar?" Its making talking to you hard, because you are talking like a very emotional person who is convinced of their own rightness, and offended that others disagree with you. If you want me to agree with you, I shouldn't have to believe that you would never lie. You're not the pope or something.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 6:21 PM · Report this
74
@Im Cool
"I've taken debate courses, I could do this also. but, I have an integrity that says that I will be 100% honest, I will continue to not play games and I will do all that I can to stop those that don't know enough to know enough to not ruin our economy and our community."

What are you trying to say? It sounds like you don't want to argue with me like its an actual debate(ya know, with supporting evidence, politeness, willingness to address the other's points) because you are dedicated to being 100% honest? Why would debating the minimum wage require you to lie? And that those that disagree with you "dont know enough to not ruin our economy and our community". Seriously? That's offensive, unsubstantiated, and belittling. If you want to make claims that you know more than lots of other people, demonstrate it.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 28, 2014 at 6:28 PM · Report this
75
I'm sorry, but anyone who drinks starbucks should not consider themselves a Seattlite. Us real Seattle people drink real coffee :P
Posted by j2patter on April 28, 2014 at 8:49 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 76
@62

The numbers you gave didn't add up. When it was pointed out to you that they didn't add up, you admitted you made them up. After having insisted you were there to bring "real" facts to the table.

And now you hide behind more unverifiable predictions? You won't show us, but you would have us believe the real "real" numbers are even worse for you? Just like you predict -- based on no facts -- that business will close.

You have no credibility. You got caught lying and now if you want to convince anyone, you're going to have to come clean. Open your books. Show us these numbers -- all the numbers -- that you claim will prove your point.

Or not. Go ahead and try to coast on your reputation for honesty. Thanks for the raise!
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on April 28, 2014 at 9:01 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 77
@53

What job losses? Care to show us?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on April 28, 2014 at 9:01 PM · Report this
78
@71, maybe it's more humorous when you see things like:

https://twitter.com/VoteSawant/status/44…
Starbucks CEO worried about $15/hr & small biz?! BS. Starbucks biz model is to destroy small biz! Donate for $15.
Posted by ChefJoe on April 28, 2014 at 9:36 PM · Report this
79
@71 surely one local Seattle coffee shop has came out in support of 15Now, CM Sawant really should buy her coffee from supporters instead of giving money to those trying to defeat it. But this is person who gave away $40000, then asked her supporters to pay off her $10000 election debit...
Posted by j2patter on April 29, 2014 at 7:18 AM · Report this
80
In 1988( when I518 passed) the national minimum wage was 3.35 and Washington State was 2.30 "well below". The raise to 3.80 the next year brought Washington from being significantly below market to above the market by roughly 15%. By 1991 ( 2years after it took effect) unemployment rose in Washington State to 6.9% in December(from the previous 5.9% from December of 1988) and then 7.4% the following year in 1992. For a point of comparison I will save you the trouble and let you know that the National unemployment rate did increase as well during that time frame but not as high as Washington.

Goes to show you're cherry picked point is garbage. Now ferociously try to disprove this and try and prove that at 9.35( top MW at state level) that raising the MW at 67% will not cause job loss in Seattle. Stop being a hypocrite shopping at the local Mom and pop stores you are pushing of a cliff and use Amazon.

http://www.davemanuel.com/historical-sta…
Posted by A real live employer on April 29, 2014 at 3:46 PM · Report this
Jeffo 81
@68

"And the reason is this: You are basically making the argument that unless you are allowed to pay people very little, your business has no chance of surviving"

This is just untrue, and intellectually dishonest.

You, personally ignore facts because they do not suit your point. How much do I'm Cool's bartenders make per hour? How bout cocktail servers?

How do you say the above quote when the truth is that FOH employees at a bar or restaurant make more than $15/hr currently? Why do you say that?

He probably pays his lead cook/chef $15+ already, or close to that. Lower tier kitchen might go as low as $12 or $11/hr. If they are seasoned veterans $13 or $14.

I estimate these wages because they are what I have, in a very similar business. This is what the market has driven us to pay, competing with the Douglas/Derschang/Meinert-type clans.

Restaurant/bar owners are ok with raising the minimum wage. We just need it done responsibly, especially when it comes to tipped employees.

As far as opening up books to some kind of "mob audit", now THAT sounds childish. It is in no way realistic/just/sane to require a business to completely open their books, lest they receive a 61% penalty. I don't want my competitors to know my numbers and I sure as heck don't want it spread over the SLOG for "hive-mind justice".
Posted by Jeffo on April 29, 2014 at 5:24 PM · Report this
82
@a real live employer - is either lying or misinformed. I-518 affected tipped workers, abolishing tip penalties in this state. Employment in that sector increased at a greater pace than the rest of the economy over the next decade. The opposition has no data to stand on, so they lie.

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
Posted by bogart14 on April 29, 2014 at 7:11 PM · Report this
83
@81

"How do you say the above quote when the truth is that FOH employees at a bar or restaurant make more than $15/hr currently?"

If these employees make more than $15/hr currently, doesn't that show that customers have enough money to pay for the price increases that a $15 minimum would cause? What's wrong with guaranteeing that workers get $15, and seeing a minor reduction in tips, but the same overall earnings?
Posted by Chareth Cutestory on April 29, 2014 at 7:32 PM · Report this
84
@81
Its not intellectually dishonest. That is the point he made directly before my post. To paraphrase, he said that any phase in wouldnt help, only a total compensation type concession would help, as it doesn't matter how long hed have to get to 15, he just cant pay it. His business would close anyway. To me that sounds like hes incapable of paying his employees any more than he already is.

I havent ignored facts in order to suit a point. To be honest, and if you look carefully, the only point I've made is that the arguments on Slog against $15 haven't been well thought out or well supported. I haven't said "youre wrong dummy!", Ive said "ok, well, show me why you think that. Lets crunch the numbers."

Do tipped workers get paid $15/hr? Are you paying your servers $15/hr? It seems to me that customers pay tips to those workers, and they may average more than $15/hr, but that is a combination of wages and tips. My statement was true. The employer doesnt pay them all the money. If the employer did, then what would be the change between now and after $15/hr minimum wage? And not all servers make more than $15/hr. I guess I dont quite understand the point you're trying to make.

I never advocated for a "mob audit". I just don't think that its intellectually honest to base arguments off of numbers that you wont allow anyone to actually see. It requires people to trust you, and not use their own judgement.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 29, 2014 at 7:54 PM · Report this
Jeffo 85
@84

Yes, it is intellectually dishonest. You are just trying to hide behind semantics.

There seems to be a push against tipping between @83 and @84. Are the two of you looking to change that culture?

"...but that is a combination of wages and tips."
Tips are wages. Taxes are paid on them as wages=they are wages.

I never advocated for a "mob audit".
I disagree, I think you did and continue to.

Posted by Jeffo on April 29, 2014 at 11:10 PM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 86
@85: The reason so many people are calling for audits is that several business owners have come out and made fact claims about the future of their businesses and the MW increase.

A couple of those people have admitted to simply lying about those numbers to prove a point, and others are fishy at best. It is the business owners who are trying to use their books as evidence, but without actually showing it. No one was asking for audits until business owners began using their own books as false "evidence."

It would be like in a courtroom a lawyer claimed they had irrefutable evidence of someone's guilt, but no one was allowed to see it. Would you happily convict based on hidden secret evidence you were not allowed to see?
Posted by Theodore Gorath on April 30, 2014 at 5:16 AM · Report this
87
@85

Why not answer the question? Why do you have to deflect?
Posted by Chareth Cutestory on April 30, 2014 at 8:30 AM · Report this
88
@JonCracolici, it's always a pleasure to see your comments come up. Thanks for keeping it measured, humane and smart.
Posted by diner mo on April 30, 2014 at 8:31 AM · Report this
Jeffo 89
@86

I have been paying attention. Your version of events is not accurate. The "open your books!!" torches were burning before I'm Cool ever made the mistake of not being exact in his numbers. I dare say, his numbers were released to ANSWER those cries. I'm Cool estimated for simplicity. He undersold what some of his employees were actually making for ease of math, not deception. His numbers are indicative and valid.

@87
My question/deflection (your word) is valid. Changing the tipping culture in this industry is not on the table. This is what is being alluded to by yourself and others. Tip credit, yes. Change the whole culture and system of tipping, no.

"If these employees make more than $15/hr currently, doesn't that show that customers have enough money to pay for the price increases that a $15 minimum would cause"
It shows that the current system in place is functioning correctly in my industry. We don't need this experiment.
Posted by Jeffo on April 30, 2014 at 9:54 AM · Report this
90
@85
Well, I guess I just have to disagree with you that I am being intellectually dishonest. What you are claiming I was being dishonest about was just a slightly rude and blunt restatement of what "I'm cool" was saying about his own business model. I didn't claim that he's not able to pay more, he did.

I'm not anti-tipping. I don't know where you got that. I was just pointing out that customers pay tips, not employers. Which is the difference between wages and tips. I always tip and will continue to because I was raised that way.

Your equivalency statement between wages and tips doesn't really work. Here's a counter example. You pay property tax on both your house and your boat. Therefore, your house is a boat.....Clearly your house wont float, and would in fact be a terrible boat. The thing is, taxes are paid on things in different ways because of how you can use that money, what that value is, how it's stored. Since wages and tips both go straight into your pocket, they are taxed the same. Since houses and boats are not cash, but still store lots a value, they are taxed similarly, with exemptions you can claim on the house because you must live somewhere, and that value can not be turned into cash on a whim. Saying everything in the same tax area is exactly the same in all ways is just weird.

I'm not advocating for a "mob audit", even if you think I am. You should read what I say I guess. I'm just saying that saying "I have conclusive evidence but no you can't see it" isn't very convincing coming from someone who's not like, a spy or something. Especially when that person has a horse in the race. You don't have to open your books, but you shouldn't be surprised when people don't take you at your word about what's in them.
Posted by JonCracolici on April 30, 2014 at 12:33 PM · Report this
91
@88
Hey thanks!
Posted by JonCracolici on April 30, 2014 at 12:45 PM · Report this
92
@89

So you refuse to answer the question, then? Doesn't the fact that restaurant and bar employees already make $15+/hr show that customers already spend enough to cover a $15 minimum wage at restaurants and bars?
Posted by Chareth Cutestory on April 30, 2014 at 9:26 PM · Report this
Jeffo 93
@90
"you shouldn't be surprised when people don't take you at your word about what's in them."

You are manufacturing my surprise.

"You don't have to open your books"

Unless... What? Unless I want to not be thought of as a liar? Again, as I have said in these threads numerous times. When I speak to REAL people, face to face I just never get called a liar or asked to "crunch the numbers" with them, lest my facts be disregarded. This only happens with biased ideologues.

Who opens their books to the public? You are saying that I am not to be taken at my word unless I do something that nobody would ever do. The IRS has every right to audit me, 15now does not. Unreasonable request.

"Your equivalency statement between wages and tips doesn't really work".

Yes it does.

Are boat taxes and home taxes the same or similar (your word)? Similar right? Are hourly wages and tip wages taxed the same or similar? Same right?

Similar is not = to anything. Tips = wages.

@92
My goodness no. It does not mean that customers already spend enough to cover a $15 MW. Feel free to prove that it does.
Posted by Jeffo on May 1, 2014 at 10:20 AM · Report this
94
@93
I'm not calling you a liar! I'm just saying that I don't have any reason to believe your predictions about the future, so I wont. And as for your interactions with real people, I guess you don't talk to a lot of engineering types. I'm not calling you a liar. But I am saying that you aren't infallible, so I'd like to see some supporting evidence. It doesn't necessarily have to be your books. Any peer reviewed study would be great, we could talk about it. If you aren't willing to open your books and talk about them, maybe you should stop using them as evidence.

And wages are not the same as tips. My example was meant to show how ridiculous it is to make equivalency statements about things in the real world based on the tax code. Here's another example. Salary paid also goes in that same box on a 1040. Does that mean that all salary paid to everyone in America is actually a tip? There are some companies out there that are GREAT tippers! Is a salary a wage? I know some people on salary who would LOVE to get overtime.

Here's another example. You and I buy the exact same make and model of car, for the same amount of money. I use it for work, and you don't. That means that I get to make additional deductions on the car. Our cars are taxed similarly, but not the same. Are they still the same make and model of car?

Finally, just use a dictionary whenever you wonder if two words mean the same thing.
Posted by JonCracolici on May 1, 2014 at 3:13 PM · Report this
95
@93

Your customers pay for food and drink, which you then use to pay your employees. The customers tip, which then brings that wage to over $15/hr. All that money is coming from the customer and is supporting a wage of $15+/hr.

You can't say you'll go out of business because customers don't have enough money to pay for your food and drinks.
Posted by Chareth Cutestory on May 2, 2014 at 12:04 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy