Minimum Wage

Latest Seattle Employment Numbers: Is Minimum Wage Hike Already Costing Jobs? [UPDATED with Data Criticism]

|

As the notion of a $15 minimum wage spreads and gains popularity, some new data of possible relevance out of Seattle via the American Enterprise Institute:

In June of last year, the Seattle city council passed a $15 minimum wage law to be phased in over time, with the first increase to $11 an hour starting on April 1, 2015. What effect will the eventual 58% increase in labor costs have on small businesses, including area restaurants? It's too soon to tell for sure, but there is already some evidence that the recent minimum wage hike to $11 an hour, along with the pending increase of an additional $4 an hour by 2017 for some businesses, has started having a negative effect on restaurant jobs in the Seattle area. The chart above shows that the Emerald City MSA started experiencing a decline in restaurant employment around the first of the year (when the state minimum wage increased to $9.47 per hour, the highest state minimum wage in the country), and the 1,300 job loss between January and June is the largest decline over that period since 2009 during the Great Recession (data here). The loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs in May following the minimum wage increase in April was the largest one month job decline since a 1,300 drop in January 2009, again during the Great Recession. In contrast to the January-June loss  of restaurant jobs in the Seattle area: a) restaurant employment nationally increased by 130,700 jobs (and by 1.2%) during that same period (data here), b) overall employment in the Seattle MSA increased 1.2% and by 21,800 jobs (data here) and c)non-Seattle MSA restaurant employment in Washington increased 3.2% and by 2,800 jobs (data here).

I reported back in March about restaurateur fears of the hike and looming further hikes in Seattle, then about some counterdata noting that, well, permits for new restaurants hadn't seemed to slow down.

The loss of potential jobs to specific individuals on the margin need not show up in overall macro data about total employment post minimum wage. Still,  the data AEI presented provides still further suggestive empirical evidence that the laws of supply and demand that underlie the entire logic of the science of economics might not disappear when it comes to labor, just because people think it would be cooler if lower wage people got paid more, as long as it isn't at their clear and direct expense.

UPDATE: Barry Ritholz, a regular critic of any empirical evidence seeming to show that the laws of supply and demand work in labor as well as anything else, points out that the AEI study's data is about an MSA far larger than the actual city of Seattle itself in which the minimum wage hike is occuring, making any direct connection between the laws and that data questionable.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

175 responses to “Latest Seattle Employment Numbers: Is Minimum Wage Hike Already Costing Jobs? [UPDATED with Data Criticism]

  1. You can have both decrease in the number of reported restaurant jobs and increase in the number of restaurants. What are the authorities going to do – raid for illegal immigrants, and cause double trouble for themselves?

    1. Yes, and then they’ll eat all the immigrants–I mean food.

      1. Well it’s not the worst idea, but Your Future Reptilian Overlords do not want you to get a head start.

  2. If restaurants are currently existing on razor-thin margins, do they really deserve to take up space in the market? And if a person can’t make an arbitrarily-set living wage, is there really any point to his employment at all?

    1. I’m not sure whether I detect sarcasm or not in your post, but I’ll address the first sentence as if it were in earnest:

      In a perfectly-efficient free market, all sellers are supposed to be operating on razor-thin margins. The intense competition is supposed to squeeze margins to near zero.

      On the flip slide, it is only due to extreme market inefficiencies that a firm can make beaucoup bucks, like a bunch of insider traders having prior access to information that others do not, etc.

      So yes, if the restaurants are existing on razor-thin margins, they ESPECIALLY deserve to participate in the market, because free markets are a very good thing, right?

  3. noting that, well, permits for new restaurants hadn’t seemed to slow down.

    This doesn’t mean much, IMHO.

    The restaurant business is brutal, with an extremely high percentage going out of business. All that means is there’s no shortage of people willing to dive into the maw of likely failure for the prestige of owning a restaurant.

    The real test will be in lost customers due to pricing and lost jobs or hour cutbacks to respond to the massive increase in operating expenses.

    1. Besides which, those ‘new’ restaurants may well not employ the same number of people.

      1. The goal, of course, is to keep the victims hidden and anonymous. That way we can declare $15 Now! Great Success!

        1. As with so many socialistic programs. Though I’d disagree with it being a goal — more like a natural consequence; unforeseeable to the Lefties. And as with these programs, it will be so easy to point to someone making the $15 MW, but impossible to point to anyone and say, with confidence, “this unemployed teenager is unemployed because of the MW.”

      2. I wouldn’t be surprised to see new & refurbished restaurants (People gotta eat! And there’s a market in people eating…) coming up with new ways of replacing labor with capital ? think of the example of Ordering Kiosks at different chains. There’s been much made in recent years over how, during the ramp-up to ACA and the questions over final regulations, a lot of companies (especially small businesses) held back on hiring and hours and opted to put money into capital investments in lieu of investing in labor (whose true costs were still unsure because of government-based externalities). This trend of giant minimum wage hikes on low-end restaurants and the like is the same sort of issue on a different market (wages versus benefits, it’s still the matter of cost of labor), so seeing companies do the same switch to investing in capital infrastructure again is ?sorry Progressives ?simple microeconomic logic.

  4. why does this foreseeable consequence fail to trouble me? #allrestaurantjobsdonotmatter.

  5. If those greedy business owners can’t give up a little bit of their obscene profits to pay people a living wage, then good riddance!

  6. Since I live not far from Seattle, will I benefit from all the commerce being driven out of the city?

    1. On a relative scale, yes.

      In practice, the dead-weight losses are large enough that the small absolute decrease in economic activity in Seattle’s neighbors will outrank any increased competitiveness.

    2. Although restaurant employment has decreased “overall employment in the Seattle MSA increased 1.2% and by 21,800 jobs”. Maybe some of those restaurant workers found better employment opportunities. Or, they simply prefer an alternative to washing dishes and serving meals to people they could never afford to buy themselves.

  7. “Latest Seattle Employment Numbers: Is Minimum Wage Hike Already Costing Jobs?”

    Yes, it started costing jobs as soon as employers figured it WAS going to become law.
    The real question is:
    ‘Is the loss large enough that even econ-ignoramuses can see it?’

    1. I’m much more interested in figuring out how to lower the costs to inform the low information types to the point where they are not ignorant of the reality of how this hurts the poor and excluded. We can do much better on that and aren’t.

  8. What I suspect will happen is that restaurant patrons will quit tipping. Wait staff will at better restaurants will earn less. Denny’s employees, busboys, and dishwashers will make more, but eventually get fired. Everybody in the Seattle restaurant business will be unhappy and blame capitalism.

    1. There’s a movement to stop tipping in Seattle restaurants, but I suspect it will be short-lived as it just seems mean-spirited.

      http://www.opposingviews.com/i…..d-gratuity

      1. Like your females, these progs will ultimately fail…because they always end up stabbing each other in the back.

      2. On the contrary – I believe that killing the tipping culture is a central goal. It’s what all the cool countries do.

        1. Oui.
          Ja.
          Kyll

        2. Anyone who spent enough time as a waiter knows that pooling tips is the quickest way to explain why socialism doesn’t work.

          Everyone makes less together instead of just the three lazy ones, and there is the added bonus that the service level drops considerably as well, so people tip less.

          Brilliant!

    2. ^This. Many will declare the evil, profit driven owners went out of business to spite the employees.

  9. The unseen is the key. Amazon is building a gazillion buildings in town and filling them up, so yeah, there are still well heeled people looking for food. There will still be restaurants and folks looking to open up restaurants. But how many more would have opened up if the wages weren’t inflated?

    I predict a long-term surge in chain restaurants as the wage increase becomes effective for the smaller businesses. Then all the hipster douchebags can complain about how great Seattle’s restaurant scene was before it went corporate, failing to realize that it went corporate because of their misguided social justice war.

    1. In the long term, it will have EXACTLY the opposite effect as intended. The much-ballyhooed wage-gap will increase making seattle a city of the really rich and the really poor, and the corporate presence over the independent restaurateur will also increase.

      This, of course will beget more regulation and economic justice candidates.

      1. “In the long term, it will have EXACTLY the opposite effect as intended. ”

        Guess again.

        “This, of course will beget more regulation and economic justice candidates.”

        Which is EXACTLY the effect intended.

  10. The best thing to happen because of this $15 minimum wage nonsense is that it finally drove me out of the Democratic Party for good.

  11. OT: The retard is so strong, it BURRRNS:

    Seattle to add tax on gun, ammunition sales

    Council President Tim Burgess has said the tax of $25 per gun and two or five cents per round of ammunition will raise an estimated hundreds of thousands of dollars annually that will be dedicated for gun-violence prevention research and programs.

    Councilmember John Okamoto spoke Monday about former students at the Seattle school where his wife works who have been victims of gun violence or have lost friends or relatives to it.
    Representatives of gun-owner groups have said the tax is illegal because a state law prohibits cities from regulating firearms. The city likely will be sued.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/se…..ion-sales/

    1. Council President Tim Burgess has said the tax of $25 per gun and two or five cents per round of ammunition will raise an estimated hundreds of thousands of dollars annually…

      …for gun-sellers in neighboring cities?

    2. Are the Seattle cops going to pay taxers on THEIR guns and ammo? If so, from where? From taxpayers I suppose? Let’s tax the SHIT outta Guv Almighty, so that Guv Almighty can fund itself, and leave the rest of us, the hell alone! May the snake eat its tail & then its body and then fade away…

    3. Prediction: lawsuit filed the first day it takes effect, judge grants injunction, Federal court slaps it down as unconstitutional per Heller and McDonald.

      1. It’s in the Wa state constitution that municipal and local districts can’t regulate firearms in any way that supersedes the state.

        The only question remaining is this “tax” a regulation?

    4. Because a nickel per bullet is surely greater than the marginal profit of murder.

  12. OT: Woman runs London Marathon without tampon to fight “period shaming” (pix included):

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..ostpopular

    1. “period shaming” (pix included):

      No thank you.

      1. You did not miss out much. She is too lean for my taste.

        1. I’ll bet money that John’s Evil Twin (the one with the goatee) LOVES those kinds of women.

          1. I’ll bet money that John’s Evil Twin (the one with the goatee) LOVES those kinds of women.

            I haven’t been around much in a while, but I do remember that John liked his women large and earthy.

            1. It’s OK to say “fatties”. That’s our John!

    2. Oh Karl, you stupid, sexy man. I beat you to it by a whole day.

      1. I first saw the story today, so I went back and searched the comments in today’s A.M. and P.M. links, using “tampon” and “period” as my keywords. So I did my due diligence, dammit. Besides, some stories are simply too awesome to be allowed to disappear after only one telling.

      2. In Karl’s defense, he was busy fixing the cable.

        1. Deine kable has been fixed.

    3. This dude has done more to fight “period shaming” than she could ever hope to do.

      He fashioned a sanitary pad out of cotton and gave it to Shanthi, demanding immediate feedback. She said he’d have to wait for some time – only then did he realise that periods were monthly. “I can’t wait a month for each feedback, it’ll take two decades!” He needed more volunteers.

      Heh. Engineers.

      1. That excerpt is both inspiring and deeply disturbing.

        In how many cultures would a man work so hard to alleviate his wife’s troubles while at the same time being so ignorant of basic human biology?

      2. Why can’t we just go back to the days when menstruating women were banished as unclean, and their clothes and linens burned?

        1. Have you priced linen sheets lately?

          1. I thought about it, and I don’t believe I’ve bought a new set of linens since 2008. Cant remember what I paid for them, but I got them at Target, so obviously they weren’t too expensive. Bought a new mattress and box spring last year, but no new sheets.

            1. Burn ’em monthly. It adds up. Could cut into your booze budget. And then the EPA gets involved, and then your month is totally ruined.

              1. Especially since there’s a 50/50 chance they’ll breach the containment damn on your sludge pond.

                1. sludge pond

                  Misogynist.

      3. He… didn’t realize that periods were monthly. The fuck.

        1. Well, he didn’t know they existed at all 2 months before that.

      4. Read the article. He’s done more to improve women’s lives than Runny McRunnyshorts ever could,

    4. I’ve seen marathon runners crap themselves and still run. So in the grand scheme of things it’s not that outrageous, but leave it to the media to active some higher meaning to it.

      1. It’s fairly common. Apparently there’s a phenomenon called “runner’s diarrhea” that affects distance runners in particular. The cause is still debated, but it’s definitely a real thing. The high-end runners are very committed, and turning in a good time means so much to them that they’ll abandon dignity and shit themselves mid-stride.

        1. George Carlin told me that you never see someone taking a shit while running at full speed.

    5. How come Donald Trump has not been asked about this yet?

      1. First they have to ask the other candidates what they think Donald Trump thinks.

  13. OT: Not looking good for Paul in Iowa. He’s down to just 3% in the polls, and has the worst favorable/unfavorable split of anyone who was in the main debate at 31/45.

    I’m curious how much of this is due to the Ron Paul/Jesse Benton scandal and how much is other stuff. One thing I noticed in the data is that among those who watched the debate, 52% had an unfavorable view of Paul while only 26% had a positive view. For those who saw clips, it was 40% favorable 42% unfavorable and for those who didn’t watch at all it was 40% favorable 21% unfavorable. It’s seems unlikely that all of that difference is due to differences in the type of Republican who watches the debate (people who did better among debate watchers include both establishment moderates like Jeb and Christie as well as solid conservatives like Cruz), so it appears Paul came off really poorly to the GOP viewers in Iowa at least. Was Christie’s 9/11 appeal that effective?

    http://www.publicpolicypolling….._81015.pdf

    1. Rand Paul doesn’t have a lantern jaw, his voice isn’t authoritative, and I bet his handshake is weak. He’ll never be president.

      1. Also, he’s short. 🙁

        1. Exactly. No one is cursed like the short man.

          1. He should sit in a wheelchair. Then he can play the MSM like a reverse Harry Truman.

              1. MechaTruman. MechaTRUMAN. MECHATRUMAN!

              2. Eh, one of them old white guys from a hundred years ago.

      2. HE SQUATS A HALF-TON OF CONSTITUTIONALISM!

      3. Obama doesn’t have an authoritative voice and probably has a weak handshake. Yet…

        1. It’s to be expected of a Democrat?

          1. Bill Clinton had a lot of car salesman charm, probably has a hearty handshake too. I bet LBJ tried to crush your hand when he could…

    2. God bless him for trying, but Team Stupid is just not that into him. He should consider folding up the tent and focus on retaining his Senate seat if things do not change by October.

      I don’t think anyone will primary him because McConnell is backing him and he’s in charge of reelecting Republicans. He’ll be a good voice in the Senate that might get another crack at the nomination if Team Stupid fucks up again.

      1. This is what is so depressing. While I don’t actually expect President Paul to accomplish anything – not even releasing all the low-level drug offenders by presidential fiat – I will consider myself lucky to have the option to vote for (or against) Walker.

      2. “If?” Surely you mean “when.” In my estimation, Paul has no chance for the nomination.
        If he’s really libertarian-minded, then he might was well take off the gloves and put himself squarely on the right side of the inevitable foreign and domestic messes the next President will willingly step into.

      3. Paul won’t get the nomination. The GOP primary voters are security state loons that are willing to consider Trump because he’s ranting about Mexicans.

        1. This. The thread is done here.

      4. I didn’t and don’t expect Paul to win the nomination, but I expected him to at least be one of the top 4 or 5 contenders. At first it was looking like he’d be in that group, and while there’s still time, he’s dropping in the polls and it’s looking less and less likely that that is going to happen. At this rate he’s going to do significantly worse than Ron Paul did in 08 and 12, and the one thing he supposedly had going for him was greater appeal to mainstream Republicans and conservatives compared to his dad. Granted the races in 08 and 12 weren’t as packed as this year, and again, it’s far from over, but still.

  14. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwqEiFg-VJA

    Remember the time hilarious Satanists trolled the Westboro Baptist church by holding a ritual they claimed turned Fred Phelps’ mom gay?

    1. Brilliant. The very best response to Westboro or like organizations – mockery. Love it. I’m not gay or a Satan worshiper but would be willing to fake to support this guy’s organization.

        1. Aren’t you headed off to vacation or to your local Chipotle for a bite to eat?

          1. He live sin LA – Chipotle is where he takes his vacations. Vacation in this context is ‘getting the fuck away from the wife an kids for a few minutes’.

            1. I do that with beer. “for a few minutes”

              1. Yeah ‘beer’ – IOW a half liter vodka. ‘Momma, why does daddy smell like pee?’

          2. I leave on Wed morning.

            There are no Chipotles in Hawaii, which is why it’s so popular with the tourists.

    1. “We squandered billions of dollars on an unnecessary war. Let’s squander billions more!”

      Not the best argument.

    2. Haha, WTF. Less than the two wars combined? Do they realize that claim doesn’t work when you’re trying to demonstrate the inexpensiveness of the thing?

      1. Well, if they had jumped back in time another 10 years and offered the choice of paying for a war in Afghanistan and Iraq or paneling houses with solar panels, I might have taken the latter choice.

      2. Well, if they had jumped back in time another 10 years and offered the choice of paying for a war in Afghanistan and Iraq or paneling houses with solar panels, I might have taken the latter choice.

      3. Haha, WTF. Less than the two wars combined? Do they realize that claim doesn’t work when you’re trying to demonstrate the inexpensiveness of the thing?

        When everything you believe is predicated on the spending of other people’s money, you don’t give too much thought to selling your ideas as economical.

    3. You think that’s dumb, check out “Solar Roadways”

      they managed to scam ~$2m off of people with an idea that doesn’t even make sense on paper. on a napkin. a wet napkin. while you’re drunk.

      1. That shit was all over my Facebook feed about a year ago. I hate to say it, but I didn’t pay much attention and didn’t think through how incredibly impractical it was. Those kinds of flaws usually jump out at me. Later I saw this guy on YouTube, Thunderf00t, did an excellent takedown of it. I love the part where he says, basically, “um, why did the inventor show this clip of he and his wife shoveling broken green and brown glass, claiming they’d recycle it into solar panels. Shouldn’t solar panels at least use *translucent* glass?”

    4. Eh. In the long run, we need widespread ownership of capital as a social safeguard against socialist movements, especially as unskilled labor becomes less and less valuable. Though doing it through government is a plausible way, since government thrives on problems, not solutions.

      1. *is not.

        1. Except government is the major obstacle to widespread ownership of capital – even if that capitol is just your ability to fit a weave while making your customers feel good.

  15. I think we can all get behind this.

    1. Fuck yeah. As shitty as the UK is, at least they have the SAS.

    2. Some background music while reading that.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3yvFmi_q1M

      1. You’re stole my song from a.m links.

        Just say ‘Thank you’ and move along.

        1. OH, sorry. *Shuffles along*

          1. I can forgive because the song is so awesomely appropriate for the context.

            1. I just want to confirm that you know what that song is actually about. If not, I can post the video.

              1. I know what the song writer says it’s about, but that doesn’t mean I need to interpret it in exactly the same way.

            2. Yeah, its actually the first thing that popped into my head when I saw that article.

        2. BTW the other choice was:
          http://media.steampowered.com/…..1_full.jpg

    3. When you said “get behind this”, I assumed it was sexual.

      I was not disappointed.

    4. Gawd, I would love to have seen that. Can you imagine what a head shot from a .50 BMG round would look like? I know it loses some steam after a thousand meters, but still, I bet the ground around the guy looked like a Pollock painting.

      1. No, no, nooooo – you don’t want to see that 🙁

        You might want to sleep sometime the next month.

        Think meteor strike to the skull… *shudder*

  16. “The loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs in May following the minimum wage increase in April was the largest one month job decline since a 1,300 drop in January 2009, again during the Great Recession.”

    I blame the progressive racists in Seattle those two Black Lives Matter protestors were talking about when they interrupted St. Bernie.

    I bet if you tracked the people who lost those restaurant jobs, they’re disproportionately minorities and single mothers.

    Black Lives Matter?

    Damn straight.

    1. Black Lives Matter – not Black

  17. In completely unrelated news, Seattle has passed a new minimum price law.

  18. the laws of supply and demand that underlie the entire logic of the science of economics might not disappear when it comes to labor, just because people think it would be cooler if lower wage people got paid more

    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.” — Philip K. Dick

  19. A dog that is smarter than the people who put True Detective together this year.

    1. Cute. and TD sucked farts. The whole daddy issues theme was way overdone. The cursory conclusion to the mystery. And the awkward sex/confession stuff. All. Sucked. Farts. Episodes 6 & 7 held promise of a better ending.

      1. But they didn’t deliver, did they?

        My sleep options are limited. I can’t believe I stayed awake for that. I could have been fucking, eating, or sleeping.

        1. I laughed during parts that were supposed to make me cry. That’s not good.

          1. Let me correct that Soave style:

            I laughed during parts that were supposed to make me cry. That’s not good okay.

            1. It IS okay. Parts of that felt like I was watching a High School play.

              I get what the fuck they were trying to do, but they had to mansplain for another 5 minutes.

              Oh, whiskey shots in the morning? WOW! That character is REALLY troubled!!! Brilliant!

              1. Did you see how they were staring at each other sullenly across a table littered with beer bottles, Playa?

                Did you see the evidence of their ennui!?!?

                1. Almost everything was overstated.

                  Industry? Let’s show a toxic waste waterfall next to kids playing soccer!!!

              2. I gained more appreciation for the acting ability and chemistry of both Harrelson and the Golden God.

          2. “I laughed during parts that were supposed to make me cry. That’s not good.”

            I laughed my ass off during the opening monologue of episode 2 where Vince Vaughn talks about how everything is papier mache and, oh, by the way, one time I was locked in a basement for three days and beat a rat to death with my fists.

      2. Everything, other than Colin Farrell’s acting and one glimpse of pantied McBooty annoyed me. I did not think it would be possible to so badly fuck up L.A. noir, and yet it happened.

        1. I liked some of the violent scenes. The shoot-out with the Mexicans, Velcoro beating up the bully kid’s dad and the pervy doctor, knifing that guy at the sex party, Semyon lighting everything on fire, the gas masks and machine guns at the Russian guy’s cabin – all solid violence. But the drama was overdone and smulchy.

          1. Woodrugh’s action scenes were very good. I was pissed when he died.

            1. The fact that he didn’t care if he lived or died made me really root for him.

          2. Yes, all of the violence was pretty good, you are correct. Even Vince Vaughn going badass was fun, especially compared to Vince Vaughn talking to his wife, or Stan’s son (I hate Stan).

            1. Fuck Stan.

              I liked Colin Farrell and I thought the last 3 or 4 episodes were at least entertaining, although I don’t know that they saved the season given how terrible the first half was.

              That first episode made me want to kill children it was so terrible.

            2. And this is how they wasted time and resources on TD – too much exposition of marginal story lines and not enough time on important plot elements. How much time was spent on Stan and Stan’s death and Stan’s kid while the actual mystery of who killed Caspere was covered in the last 10 stupid minutes?

              1. And they did the same thing in the first season only less egregiously. Pizzolato basically doubled down on the worst aspects of the first season, except this time he had a woman who killed people with knives because his feelings got hurt by the accusations of misogyny during the first season.

                So he tried to undercut the misogynistic criticisms while ignoring all the more important criticisms of the actual fucking product he was putting out.

    2. “WHERE IS SHE???”

      “In a better place than this..”

      *BLAM BLAM BLAM*

      And that 8th grader earned a C- with that screenplay.

      1. Yes, that was awful. I especially liked that he failed to send the audio recording to his son because there was literally no reason for him to fail other than so Nic Pizzolato could say ‘SEE VIEWER! ALL IS FUTILE! WORSHIP MY PESSIMISTIC PHILOSOPHY PEONS!’

        Although I will say that the cops running onto the scene and wildly opening fire and killing the victim in the scene where they were fighting in the train station was hilarious since that’s exactly what cops would do.

        Oh no! The guy with a knife is about to stab that other guy! We’d better shoot both of them, just to make sure!

        1. Yeah, I think it was at least implied that they dumped the chief in that scene. Black dude in civies, that’s what happens.

        2. That was the part where I laughed. Yep, just right. LAPD in action.

          1. They completely hit us over the head with the parent/child failure to connect and or communicate theme: Velcoro and his son (who turns out is his son) and his own father, Bizz and her father, Semyon and his failure at becoming a father, and Woodrugh dead before his own kid arrives, and Bizz giving birth to Velcoro’s kid.

            Also, the mayor of the town and his kid. The kid murders the father so he can assume power.

            Yeah, we get it, Nick, parents and kids? Fucked up, ah?

            1. If they want to go with that theme, fine. No need to hit us over the head with it.

              And this is coming from the best father in the universe, in spite of what you might have heard.

              1. Nothing Bo could say would leave any real impression. He’s a punk kid with no life experience and kind of a terrible personality.

                Your children will probably grow to hate you once they’ve realized you’ve denied them the Chipotle experience they so obviously need.

                1. It left an impression on you, because that’s why you broke up with me. No couples massages for us in Hawaii! Now I need to find a 25 year old with the libido of a 40 year old (hypothetically, for a fake internet crush).

              2. “And this is coming from the best father in the universe, in spite of what you might have heard.”

                Wait, did Bo try to insult your parenting skills even though he doesn’t know you?

                That’s fucking hilarious.

                1. He doesn’t know anyone.

                  I’m a people person. I actually love people, even if they don’t believe what I believe. The flip side of that is I’m able to pinpoint insecurities quite easily, and I’ll pull the trigger if someone deserves it. I did that to Bo, and he tried to do it back, with negative results.

                  Being a father is the most important thing I’ll ever do, so you’d better fucking believe that I’m good at it.

                  1. Did some Bo posts get deleted or something?

                    The sequence above is pretty incoherent.

                    1. No, this is in reference to some retarded shit he said a month or two ago.

    3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_HuFuKiq8U

      A memory of better True Detective days. May such days dawn once more in TD’s future.

      1. High quality violence.

      2. When you’ve peaked, you’ve peaked. You can’t get any better than that. Fact.

  20. Alderman in Ferguson let protesters hide from gunfire in his office, so they stole his laptops and iPads.

    Really fine upstanding men and women in Ferguson right now. Between the shithead protesters and the thug cops, the only actual victims seem to be the poor people who actually live there.

    1. #AppleResaleValueMatters

      1. I thought our brilliant legislators fixed that by unicorn wishing anti theft features into apple products.

        1. Did they? I have no idea. iphones were the #1 most-stolen-item in America in 2009-2012. I think it was the iphone 4 where it peaked. It was also, if i recall, the only phone which could not be insured by the carrier.

          1. CA, and possibly NY, IIRC, required a tracking system that couldn’t be turned off.

            When I shipped my phone in for replacement (while in the hospital for the birth of my son), the customer support guy on the phone made me turn off the “find my iPhone” feature with the passcode because apple couldn’t turn it off themselves, even if they bricked and wiped it.

    2. #TheAngryBirdnessofInequality

    3. BWAHAHAHA!!

  21. Of course all the Seattle MW law will really accomplish is what has been waiting to happen – patiently waiting the moment when technology and high labor costs create a paradigm shift: the employee-less restaurant. The technology already exists to open a fast food eatery with only two human workers per shift. Check out Momentum Machines, Inc.

  22. Most libs, like Obama, couldn’t run a lemonade stand. Their knowledge of basic economics is abysmal.

    1. Let’s see…

      Stock market doubled
      Deficits cut by two-thirds
      12 million new jobs – the “best private sector jobs creation performance in American history” – and that’s according to Forbes.

      Yeah, it’s nice to think he doesn’t know anything. But actual data proves otherwise.

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/ad…..investing/

      1. What did obama do policy wise to achieve these things? The talking point has been that republicans wouldnt let him do anything. Not sure those jobs are full time career type jobs either. As far as the stock market doesnt that mean more inequality. The recovery has been slow. And you can thank the pub house for the deficit reduction since they wouldnt go along with the dem spending spree

      2. You seem to confuse something happening under Obama’s watch as happening due to Obama. They aren’t necessarily the same.

  23. I was just reading today about the great Cascadia earthquake and tsunami of January 26, 1700. In 2030, after the next such quake, I will look out over the wreckage where Seattle and Portland once stood and say,

    “It’s a good thing liberals ignored Reason’s advice and enacted the $15 minimum wage. Two million people moved inland looking for work, so that by the time the wave struck, these once-thriving coastal communities had become ghost towns.”

  24. The disingenuous obsession with “restaurant jobs” is getting ridiculous. Some industries go up, some go down. Cherry-picking one industry may make an idiot think you’re actually making a point, but anyone with half a brain can see right through it.

    Key phrase: “overall employment in the Seattle MSA increased 1.2%”

    End of story.

    1. Restaurant jobs are an area where the min wage has impact…specifically fast food. Hence why it was picked. Do you know why it was originally instituted?

  25. I guess politicians have forgotten that employers pay the IRS equal taxes to what comes out of an employees check. That’s a BIG grind on some employers.

  26. Ritholz’ complaint about the larger MSA is mitigated by the fact that the community SeaTac had already implemented the $15 MW so a large part of the MSA is indeed affected. Note, it will now be extended to airport employees as well. It is also on the Tacoma ballot for November.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.