Chaos in Baltimore

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Wages are only one part of a company's expenses. Paying some share of employees double doesn't mean expenses double.

True, it's not a direct cause and effect ratio. His point that the company will take steps to minimize impact, though, is spot on. They almost certainly would cut some of those workers and try to get by with less, and they would also increase prices.

Also, with Obamacare in place, increased wages also means increased benefits cost for companies.

[bob]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Did I?

But, of course CPI would increase somewhat - however, there is a wide range of things that the government does in order to control inflation. Those wouldn't disappear if wages rise.

To be fair, it might have been someone else that said that minimum wage is such a low impact to our economy that there would be no impact. Apologies if I incorrectly placed that on you.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

True, it's not a direct cause and effect ratio. His point that the company will take steps to minimize impact, though, is spot on. They almost certainly would cut some of those workers and try to get by with less, and they would also increase prices.

Also, with Obamacare in place, increased wages also means increased benefits cost for companies.

Agreed.

I just think the doomsday scenarios are way overblown. It will cause some pain, but will largely have little negative impact on the overall economy.

I also agree with a phase-in, and I'd be fine starting with an inflation adjusted minimum that matches the original law.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

Therefore, the majority of people who are working for min wage here must be teens and college students on a short-ish term basis. So, why do we need to raise the min wage for them?

Because college is insanely expensive?

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

My point was there seems to be some truth in that you can raise it too high (and too fast).

Those are more policy considerations. (though too fast may not be) In the weighing of the positives and negatives (which are mostly increased unemployment), people have to decide what they can deal with.

Most neoclassical economists would argue to eliminate the minimum wage altogether. Though hardly anyone pays attention to neoclassical economics anymore.

For example, if unemployment is low and cost of living is increasing, that means fewer people are presumably working at min wage. Therefore, the majority of people who are working for min wage here must be teens and college students on a short-ish term basis. So, why do we need to raise the min wage for them?

Of the adults working full time, most are minorities from poor communities, so it seems we should do more to address that problem in ways other than a wage increase.

Why not both? Address problems of poor communities and increase the minimum wage?

Focusing on unemployment is important because moderate economic theory indicates that when minimum wage is "too high" it leads to increases in unemployment. When minimum wage is "just right" (so to speak) it may stimulate spending as poorer workers have a higher marginal propensity to consume - and may lead to an optimal aggregate demand.

Anyways, that is the main concern of "too high" minimum wages - too high unemployment. If unemployment is low that means that minimum wage increases aren't resulting in the feared increases of unemployment and therefore may indicate that it the wage increase isn't "too high" at all.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I just think the doomsday scenarios are way overblown. It will cause some pain, but will largely have little negative impact on the overall economy.

I also agree with a phase-in, and I'd be fine starting with an inflation adjusted minimum that matches the original law.

This is my position as well. It's not going to be pain-free, but the benefits will outweigh the negatives, especially with a phase-in. Also adjusting to inflation would allow the purchasing power of the wage to stay the same while allowing businesses to know in advance of labor cost changes.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

There simply aren't enough high skilled jobs for 150 million (or even 100 million) people. So if you have to pay more for that Whopper so people can make a living wage, too damned bad.

This isn't true. There is a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry that we can't match. It's why the tech industry has pushed so hard to open immigration more so they can bring in talent from overseas. We have nurse shortages and a lack of skilled workers in many manual labor fields.

But those jobs require hard work to qualify for and working at Burger King doesn't.

[nol]

Originally Posted by panerd

I am also not an economist but would guess if say Walmart has 50 people working at any one time and were told to double their pay that 25 of them would not have jobs tomorrow.

OK, and that would manifest itself as a cost that makes your shopping experience at Walmart worse. Maybe stuff costs a bit more, maybe you have to spend more time looking for something because the shelves aren't stocked or there isn't an employee around to ask, whatever.

The initial point was that as it currently stands, most of those 50 Walmart employees are on welfare. You pay that cost either at the store or as a taxpayer. That's exactly what was referred to here:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

For whatever reason it appears that every other policy decision needs to have its good and bad parts looked at in balance, aside from the minimum wage. It's always about folks being laid off, but never about any potential benefits - though I guess we could always keep the min wage low or non-existent if we dramatically increase government welfare for those making under the poverty line... that's one option.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

This isn't true. There is a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry that we can't match. It's why the tech industry has pushed so hard to open immigration more so they can bring in talent from overseas. We have nurse shortages and a lack of skilled workers in many manual labor fields.

But those jobs require hard work to qualify for and working at Burger King doesn't.

Yes, there is a huge demand for skilled tech labor, but the deficit is nowhere near the number he was mentioning. There are around 120k-150k new H1B's issued yearly, with another 30-50k renewals. The tech industry is looking to get that combined number up to 500k.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

This isn't true. There is a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry that we can't match. It's why the tech industry has pushed so hard to open immigration more so they can bring in talent from overseas. We have nurse shortages and a lack of skilled workers in many manual labor fields.

I don't know about this. There's a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry...at mediocre salary levels. They're pushing hard for foreign IT because it's cheaper.

[Dutch]

As long as raising minimum wage doesn't hurt the business, I'm for it. It realm does need to mirror cost of living...a federal minimum wage hike that makes sense in downtown NY needs to be different than small town Montana.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

I don't know about this. There's a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry...at mediocre salary levels. They're pushing hard for foreign IT because it's cheaper.

I don't know what is considered mediocre. But if you can code, you can easily support your family on that income. There are jobs everywhere in the tech industry if people want them.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

I don't know about this. There's a huge demand for skilled people in the tech industry...at mediocre salary levels. They're pushing hard for foreign IT because it's cheaper.

This...

Large companies are really pushing to "outsource" their development and other tech positions to foreign contractors that are effectively full time employees, just making far less money and less likely to complain about sketchy treatment.

[stevew]

So I was looking up stuff for a friend because she's now mandated overtime on both Saturday and Sunday(thanks Lundberg) and I didn't realize that if your job determines that you need to work 7 days a week, there isn't shit you can do about it. In nearly every state. Plus right now they're doing this temp to hire shit where they keep you temporary for up to 2 years or so before offering you full time and the benefits associated with.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by bob

This...

Large companies are really pushing to "outsource" their development and other tech positions to foreign contractors that are effectively full time employees, just making far less money and less likely to complain about sketchy treatment.

I'm in the industry and if you are a skilled programmer, jobs are good and plenty.

[bob]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm in the industry and if you are a skilled programmer, jobs are good and plenty.

I'm in the industry too and was told to prepare to have my entire team outsourced.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm in the industry and if you are a skilled programmer, jobs are good and plenty.

Same here, and entry level developers start at 45-60k. That's far above "mediocre" for a kid fresh out of college.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by bob

less likely to complain about sketchy treatment.

Yep, because if they complain and lose their job they can't get another one - they get shipped back home.

[bob]

Originally Posted by Raven

Same here, and entry level developers start at 45-60k. That's far above "mediocre" for a kid fresh out of college.

Oh, I absolutely agree that there is good opportunity for the fresh out of college kid. Things get a little shakier once you are late 40s / early 50s. But that could be the entire workforce - I don't know as much about other industries.

[cuervo72]

I don't know if this has been posted, but this seems like pretty good insight:

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish | The Marshall Project

Makes sense how it would be easy for someone like Gray to get a rap sheet. That's not to say he was law-abiding in the strictest sense, but as far as the rundown on Snopes goes, he wasn't prosecuted for everything and a lot of the drug charges were for marijuana. Somehow I don't think white frat bros (or hell, middle-aged white guys with white collar jobs) are rounded up on the regular for smoking weed. Which we damn well know a lot of them do.

[bhlloy]

Originally Posted by Raven

Same here, and entry level developers start at 45-60k. That's far above "mediocre" for a kid fresh out of college.

Which is why for me, this shit largely starts with education. What chance does a kid from inner city Baltimore have of becoming an entry level programmer when the schools are basically failing to even teach kids to read or do basic math? Fund inner city schools and after school projects and then maybe you can sit there and judge kids who never had a chance at life for not becoming an IT professional by the age of 23. The disparity of public education in the US is embarrassing for a country that claims to be the greatest in the world.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I don't know if this has been posted, but this seems like pretty good insight:

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish | The Marshall Project

Makes sense how it would be easy for someone like Gray to get a rap sheet. That's not to say he was law-abiding in the strictest sense, but as far as the rundown on Snopes goes, he wasn't prosecuted for everything and a lot of the drug charges were for marijuana. Somehow I don't think white frat bros (or hell, middle-aged white guys with white collar jobs) are rounded up on the regular for smoking weed. Which we damn well know a lot of them do.

Well at least in Philly the cops target white guys too.

Former Philly Drug Officer Admits "Thousands" of Crimes, Lies | NBC 10 Philadelphia

[SportsDino]

Since real wages are at best stagnant while any measure of money supply (GDP, total assets, take your pick) has grown dramatically over the same time is the supposed stimulus effect of minimum wage increase on other jobs really a bad thing? Assuming most of you work for a living I would jump in the boat that increases your wages and not fret about the boogeyman of inflation. The machinations of the Fed would consider the blip to net spending caused by minimum wage a rounding error.

Prices are more complicated and stickier than advertised in this thread or by media pundits. If you take into account the growing income disparity gap it is clear that a shock to the system does not translate directly into dollar for dollar price raises. More likely a reasonable wage level increase will stimulate consumer spending, overall wages at the lower tiers to increase, and decreases marginal return to capital investors. This is because in that game it is still economically favorable to eat the lower margin but maintain revenue as the alternative is losing market to other competitors who will pay the wage.

You cannot cut workers beyond skeleton crew, there is a point the business just collapses. However, there is enough money to be made that even if those businesses fail I think you will find plenty survive in the market that you do not notice all that much. It could all be moot as aggregate demand increases it could boom the economy, historically real wage growth is associated with more good times than bad.

Take the religion out of your opinions and try to understand how some numbers would actually work. Marginal wealth and spending rates are ultimately what matter, if resources are not constrained then generally more wealth distribution and higher spending makes a better economy. It cannot be taken to absurd levels, but there is a lot of economics research about how the poor and middle class react to wages. Unfortunately, anyone can hire an economist to come up with statistical lies to support any opinion.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I don't know if this has been posted, but this seems like pretty good insight:

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish | The Marshall Project

Makes sense how it would be easy for someone like Gray to get a rap sheet. That's not to say he was law-abiding in the strictest sense, but as far as the rundown on Snopes goes, he wasn't prosecuted for everything and a lot of the drug charges were for marijuana. Somehow I don't think white frat bros (or hell, middle-aged white guys with white collar jobs) are rounded up on the regular for smoking weed. Which we damn well know a lot of them do.

I know that bad stuff goes on but the white knighting of Gray is ridiculous. He was a career criminal and the neighborhood is better off without him.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

He was a career criminal and the neighborhood is better off without him.

So your answer then is to kill undesirables. Guess I'm done here. Enjoy your miserable existence.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

So your answer then is to kill undesirables. Guess I'm done here. Enjoy your miserable existence.

Not at all. If someone killed him, they should be brought to justice. My answer would be to lock him up and throw away the key.

I'm just not going to shed any tears over his death. The community is better off without him. All this talk about how these communities are in terrible shape yet people want to deify someone who assaulted, burglarized, and sold poison to children in it. If you want that community to improve, removing people like Freddie Gray from it is a good thing.

[Edward64]

FWIW.

Good job everyone for a nice, thought provoking and, for the most part, civil discussion.

[RainMaker]

Prisoner in van said Freddie Gray was ‘trying to injure himself,’ document says - The Washington Post

[nol]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

I don't know if this has been posted, but this seems like pretty good insight:

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish | The Marshall Project

Makes sense how it would be easy for someone like Gray to get a rap sheet. That's not to say he was law-abiding in the strictest sense, but as far as the rundown on Snopes goes, he wasn't prosecuted for everything and a lot of the drug charges were for marijuana. Somehow I don't think white frat bros (or hell, middle-aged white guys with white collar jobs) are rounded up on the regular for smoking weed. Which we damn well know a lot of them do.

Right, and this always gets lost in the race to yell out, "The police aren't racist, criminals are scum whether they're white, black, or green!" There are thousands of ways to break the law and become a criminal, so the police aren't going to catch all the lawbreakers; they need the electorate to tell them which crimes should be enforced more vigorously. And when in doubt, the answer to that is "not the ones that I (or someone who looks like me) would be more likely to commit."

If most people are of the opinion that the only good drug user/dealer is a dead or imprisoned one, then stop-and-frisk should be implemented nationwide: more arrests + more convictions = good. However, such policies are only approved with the tacit acknowledgement that the increased surveillance will not be random.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Edward64

FWIW.

Good job everyone for a nice, thought provoking and, for the most part, civil discussion.

YOU TAKE THAT BACK YOU MARXIST LIBERTARIAN!!@#@!!

[Groundhog]

The, uhh, live "arrest" of Joseph Kent caught on CNN is... interesting.

[Subby]

Powerful cover on this week's edition of Time magazine:

26-year-old amateur Baltimore photographer shot this week's @Time cover. "I'm speechless." http://t.co/PQXlDEAgpI pic.twitter.com/YpVEBy3a5I

— Sam Jacobs (@sampjacobs) April 30, 2015

[BillJasper]

David Simon on Baltimore’s Anguish | The Marshall Project

Originally, early in his tenure, O’Malley brought Ed Norris in as commissioner and Ed knew his business. He’d been a criminal investigator and commander in New York and he knew police work. And so, for a time, real crime suppression and good retroactive investigation was emphasized, and for the Baltimore department, it was kind of like a fat man going on a diet. Just leave the French fries on the plate and you lose the first ten pounds. The initial crime reductions in Baltimore under O’Malley were legit and O’Malley deserved some credit.

But that wasn’t enough. O’Malley needed to show crime reduction stats that were not only improbable, but unsustainable without manipulation. And so there were people from City Hall who walked over Norris and made it clear to the district commanders that crime was going to fall by some astonishing rates. Eventually, Norris got fed up with the interference from City Hall and walked, and then more malleable police commissioners followed, until indeed, the crime rate fell dramatically. On paper.

How? There were two initiatives. First, the department began sweeping the streets of the inner city, taking bodies on ridiculous humbles, mass arrests, sending thousands of people to city jail, hundreds every night, thousands in a month. They actually had police supervisors stationed with printed forms at the city jail – forms that said, essentially, you can go home now if you sign away any liability the city has for false arrest, or you can not sign the form and spend the weekend in jail until you see a court commissioner. And tens of thousands of people signed that form.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by nol

There are thousands of ways to break the law and become a criminal, so the police aren't going to catch all the lawbreakers; they need the electorate to tell them which crimes should be enforced more vigorously. And when in doubt, the answer to that is "not the ones that I (or someone who looks like me) would be more likely to commit."

I don't disagree with anything you said here. However, there are other complicating factors. Now, I doubt the "system" takes this into account, but I *strongly* suspect this to be true in most cases:

The two-bit weed dealer in the inner city does significantly more damage to his own community than the two-bit weed dealer in suburbia does to his.

(And to be clear, I'm not saying that the above is remotely "how it should be," or that as a result the inner city drug dealer "should" be punished more harshly, I'm just stating what I perceive to be part of the reality of the situation.)

Here's what I mean by that statement. I knew a few guys in my neighborhood, which was all black, and income ranged basically from working class to well below the poverty line. The two-bit weed dealers in my neighborhood had nice shoes, nice jam boxes (this was the 80s), and were generally looked up to by the poorer kids in the 'hood, in no small part due to the fact that they viewed what the dealers had to be attainable. ("Jack ain't got no daddy and his mama on welfare just like me, and he got that new box, that gold chain, and them Air Jordans in just a couple of months of dealin', I can do that too!") Jack wasn't dealing weed to get more weed. He may have only been a two-bit weed dealer, but that was his job, and to kids nearby, it looked like a lucrative one, and as a result, he drew others into that lifestyle, one that would eventually lead to harder crime and--for him--15ish years in prison.

On the other hand, I'm reasonably confident that "Dan", "James", and "Percy" all sold weed at one time or another when they were at Tucker High and perhaps in middle school as well. They sold weed to have money to smoke weed. All three were from families that were better off financially than anyone in my old neighborhood, and probably than any two families combined. Virtually no one looked up to them, aspired to sell drugs, and as far as I know, they had little/no ripple effect in the community. All three are now gainfully employed. In fact, one served honorably in Afghanistan and another is a cop.

This also speaks to their starting points. When you start with more, you have more margin for error. My father grew up in utter poverty. If he'd committed a relatively petty offense in his late teens, the ripple effect (gotta quit school to get a job to pay the fine or else go to jail and fall so far behind in school that catching up seems impossible) quite possibly would have ruined him for the rest of his life. If I'd committed a relatively minor petty offense in my late teens, my dad pays the bail/fine/legal fees, and I have to work all summer to pay him back rather than my typical high school summer of going off somewhere to enrich my education. If the offense is bad enough and therefore costly enough, maybe it even means that he has to dip into the money he had set aside for me to finish high school at the private school I attended and go to public school instead, and maybe I get into a lesser college, but I still get in. I feel some consequences, but they are way less than his. And if one of my friends from private school who was paying full tuition commits the same offense, his parents pay for it, he doesn't have to pay them back, and it results in him being grounded for a few weeks, and that's about it. That's just life. Life's not fair. The reality is that if you have less, you have less margin for error.

[ISiddiqui]

Well, O'Malley's Presidential run wasn't going to really go anywhere anyways...

[JPhillips]

freddie-grays-life-a-study-in-the-sad-effects-of-lead-paint

When he was 22 months old his blood lead level was nearly eight times what doctors consider safe. If only fixing this problem wasn't socialism. Oh, well I'm sure it isn't causing any real harm.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

freddie-grays-life-a-study-in-the-sad-effects-of-lead-paint

When he was 22 months old his blood lead level was nearly eight times what doctors consider safe. If only fixing this problem wasn't socialism. Oh, well I'm sure it isn't causing any real harm.

I don't even know why you posted this? Don't you know Freddie should've just pulled himself up by his bootstraps, like white people?

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I don't even know why you posted this? Don't you know Freddie should've just pulled himself up by his bootstraps, like law abiding citizens?

FIFY

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

freddie-grays-life-a-study-in-the-sad-effects-of-lead-paint

When he was 22 months old his blood lead level was nearly eight times what doctors consider safe. If only fixing this problem wasn't socialism. Oh, well I'm sure it isn't causing any real harm.

I'm guessing the Baltimore police stations have lead paint in them. How else you want to explain their thuggish behavior?

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

FIFY

Here's the thing, as we've learned over the past few days, the Baltimore PD is so corrupt that we really don't know what kind of individual he was.

[RainMaker]

Yeah, lots of people get 20 false arrests on their record.

[BillJasper]

A Facebook post from my wife:

Baltimore's history of police brutality has led to the overflow of anger and defeat and desperation we now see on the news. How long can a human being be demoralized and dehumanized before they become the monster they've been accused of always being?

[Dutch]

White people. They are the worst.

[Raven]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

A Facebook post from my wife:

That's cute. Did she get as many likes as she was hoping to?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

A Facebook post from my wife:

Damn brother, don' believe Ida told that.

[nol]

Originally Posted by Raven

That's cute. Did she get as many likes as she was hoping to?

That's cute. Looks like someone's feeling a little better after the harrowing experience of having his evening commute disrupted.

[Raven]

[/list]

Originally Posted by nol

That's cute. Looks like someone's feeling a little better after the harrowing experience of having his evening commute disrupted.

Is that the extent of the impact of this on my life, my families/friends lives?

[nol]

Originally Posted by Raven

[/list]
Is that the extent of the impact of this on my life, my families/friends lives?

From what you've conveyed through your posts, yes. People protesting and rioting is certainly an inconvenience, and it's definitely annoying to have the national media focusing on a low point in Baltimore's history.

[BillJasper]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Damn brother, don' believe Ida told that.

It means when people are systematically mistreated, they will eventually lash out. But I suspect you knew that.

Does anyone believe that white people would put up with being mistreated as a group over the course of centuries without lashing out?

[panerd]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

I don't even know why you posted this? Don't you know Freddie should've just pulled himself up by his bootstraps, like white people?

Who is the racist? Certainly not the white guy who thinks a black guy with 20+ arrests was just the typical dumb black guy who had no other alternative but to turn to a life of crime... basically for no other reason than he isn't white. Sounds like you would fit right in at a KKK meeting... they feel the same way as you.