Seattle's $15 Minimum Wage: Somebody's Gotta Pay. Why Not You?
A Seattle airport parking lot has added on an 8.25 percent "living wage surcharge" to customers' bills, reports Mark J. Perry at AEI:
A $15 per hour minimum wage might sound good in theory, but ends up having many unintended, secondary, negative consequences in the form of less employment, reduced hours, reduced job and business creation, higher prices for consumers, etc. In the end, and maybe very soon, it will be evident that SeaTac's $15 per hour minimum wage, like all government mandated price controls, are really an "economic death wish."...The company that issued the [parking] receipt ... is MasterPark at the Seattle's SeaTac Airport. According to its website, the company now charges a $0.99 per day "living wage surchage." For a 7-day period that would add $6.93 and 8.25% to the base fee of $84. For a 30-day parking fee of $199, the $29.70 "living wage surcharge" would add a tax of almost 15% to the base rate.
via @reasonpolicy
A state which determines what its people earn is called...
Radwaste at June 6, 2014 4:52 AM
Ultimately, the end user, is the one who is always going to pay.
Or the business shuts down, because they cant make a profit.
I think it is already a minimum of twenty bucks to park at the SeaTac airport.
Parking lots can be largely automated friends, with ticket machines, and cameras.
A 15 dollar minimum wage will be the driver to automate as much as possible.
Isab at June 6, 2014 6:49 AM
Ultimately, the end user, is the one who is always going to pay.
Yes.
And once it becomes too much, they find a way to avoid the charges. Or they go to the boss and ask for a cost of living adjustment. And the boss, feeling the exact same pinch - my wages from a year ago don't go nearly as far today - will at least be sympathetic to the request. Eventually, it will happen.
And the $15/hour peoples? they'll be back to the same standard of living, since everything they need will be more expensive.
I R A Darth Aggie at June 6, 2014 7:31 AM
One thing to ask the supporters of increasing the minimum wage: why stop at $15/hour? why not $50? $100?
Free hint: it is inflationary. You have more dollars chasing a relatively fixed amount of goods, for instance housing. You think your cost of housing won't go up??
Then there's the whole "for every 10% increase in minimum wage, there is a corresponding 1% decrease in the number of such jobs".
Again: it isn't what they've done and the results, but what they say they've done, and what they say they're going to do. Because it makes them feel better about themselves.
I R A Darth Aggie at June 6, 2014 7:36 AM
Well, the good thing about this is that we'll be able to see the actual effects of a fairly substantial rise in the minimum wage. I'm on the fence on this issue, and I'm looking forward to seeing what happens to Seattle's unemployment rates and prices, versus standards of living and wages.
I would ask: if you're against the higher minimum wage, if prices and unemployment don't go up (more than average around the country), would that change your opinion? Or if you're in favor of the higher minimum wage, if unemployment and prices skyrocket would that change your mind?
clinky at June 6, 2014 11:02 PM
"One thing to ask the supporters of increasing the minimum wage: why stop at $15/hour? why not $50? $100?"
Except this isn't a very good question.
If someone suggests that is would be healthy for you to drink a half gallon of water per day, it would be an inappropriate objection to respond with something along the lines of:
"Why stop at half a gallon?... why not 2 gallons?, why not 4?"
The reason such an objection is inappropriate is that it makes the erroneous assumption that if someone is suggesting a certain course of action is advisable, that this person also believes that going further and further in that same direction would be even better.
Just to be clear, half a gallon of water a day is healthy... 4 gallons per day can result in severe health problems up to and including death.
That someone might suggest that you aren't drinking enough water isn't the same as them suggesting that you should drink as much as you possibly can without an upper limit.
It ignores the possibility that the minimum wage might be a "goldilocks problem" in that the optimal solution is to set it at a level that is not too high and not too low.
That someone might argue that it is too low currently in no way suggests that they think it should be increased without limit.
Most problems we encounter in life fall into this category, only a few fall into the category where more is always better.
Few people would foolishly suggest to a company that if they think it is justifiable to raise the advertising budget to 15 million dollars that they must then think it would be even better to raise it to 100 million dollars. 15 million might be the correct amount to maximize profits, while 100 million might put them out of business.
There is an optimal setting for that value that depends upon a wide variety of factors.
I think pretty much everyone would agree that setting the minimum wage to $100 per hour falls outside of a range that is reasonable for very similar reasons.
I've never heard anyone advocate for a value that high precisely because it so obviously falls outside of the "just right" zone.
Artemis at June 7, 2014 5:17 AM
An acquaintance who is extremely liberal and owns a business - small as in I think it only has 4 employees plus him. He was griping about how it was not making any money. A few minutes later someone brought up the minimum way thing... The guy says he likes it and thinks he should be paying his employees around $25 hour - but can't because the store is losing money as he can't raise prices...he is already losing sales. He was kind funny to see him try to struggle to work out things.
Later that day I went by his shop (I knew he was going to be there) and said I wanted to buy a particular item...I realized they would likely have to order it. The particular item I want is a Japanese market only item or close to it...they actually had a cheap version for the US market. I knew how much it would cost me to get it from Japan including shipping so like he had asked us early I would give them a shot at getting it for me. They could get it but wanted a lot. I declined and bought one from California for 2/3 price plus a little shipping. I want to support the guy but he has to do better than that.
The Former Banker at June 7, 2014 11:11 PM
I have used Masterpark in the past in Seattle. I will PROUDLY continue to do so now, even with the increase because those people DESERVE better pay. I'd rather pay a bit more where I know the employees are being paid a better wage than being used as I have seen other parking places treat their people. Plus, it is still a lot cheaper than parking at the airport and better security besides.
Carl Pietrantonio at June 9, 2014 6:57 AM
Leave a comment