Seattle continues efforts to kill jobs...

Come to DC. We've got all the problems of the whole rest of the country all in one spot! High taxes, insane traffic, unaffordable housing, too many Democrats, massive crowds, and the federal government! W0o-hoo!

I visited Seattle for two weeks back in the early 1980s. Loved it, thought it was beautiful, was very impressed. Of course, the early 1980s are now what, 30+ years ago? Ah well . . .

In the 00's I used to go up there at least once a year. I haven't been up there since 2010.

I've never been to Seattle, but will visit there this summer. I have been to DC - will never return under my own volition.

The first gen nuBeetle was cute....from a marketing perspective, though, that was a bit of a problem cuz VW didn't want it to be known as the college girl car.

You'll notice the redesign is considerably more butch looking and doesn't come in bright colors anymore

Going to DC was the only time I've ever been to the east coast, and I'm not interested in a return trip. Seattle was cool until about 2001. After that, it was a steady slide into tech bros, bums and douchebags. It's totally fucked, now.

Still has bright colors - I'll be maybe getting a brand new one when mine finally craps out. Hard to say right now though.

It just doesn't feel like a beetle unless the engine is in the back and the battery is under the backseat.

Speaking of Seattle....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ao...used-of-raping-a-crack-addicted-teenager-3-d/

Not sure how true these allegations are considering they supposedly happened thirty years ago and they are right in the middle of a campaign.

Metro had 3rd highest job growth in nation last year.

https://www.heraldnet.com/business/pacific-northwest-leads-most-of-the-nation-in-employment/

And you can smell gas.

http://www.thespectrum.com/story/op...aws-destroying-jobs-just-predicted/416597001/

An interesting read though it is an opinion piece and short on hard data.

Good news! Hard data:

Seattle’s minimum wage increases pay without costing jobs, new report says

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/...-wage-increases-pay-without-cutting-jobs.html

Seatrle has a tech boom which helps to counter act the negative drag caused by a higher minimum wage. L.A. does not so we shall see. In San Diego I have seen a lot of mom and pops close their doors as the minimum wage went from $8 to $11 in just 2.5 years. It will likely get worse as it is automatically going up to $15.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...se-appears-to-be-killing-restaurant-jobs/amp/

In San Diego the hikes in the minimum wage cause job growth in the restaurant sector to fall by 4/5ths.

Or it simply follows the national trend of oversupply in the restaurant industry talked about a year ago.

Analysts see tough times ahead for restaurant industry​

"We have finished an extensive study on restaurant supply and the concurrent impact on [same-store sales] and labor," Barish wrote. "We believe the industry has at least 18 months of challenges ahead in terms of softer [same-store sales] and higher labor costs because of capacity growth and labor tightness, a year after the stock peak in summer '15."

Barish, who lowered 2017 earnings-per-share estimates by an average of 3 percent, noted that the industry has become oversaturated with restaurant options, leading to slower foot traffic at major chains.

Steve, that means *more* jobs, not fewer.
If the drop in 'same store sales' is because of the many new start-up restaurants, you got it backwards (as revealed in you post) - labor tightness leads to full employment, and higher wage rates (that occur naturally, not by state-mandate). So, more restaurants trying to hire the same small segment of min. wage workers, or worse, a workforce made even smaller from artificially set, state mandated exaggerated rate of pay - as your post put it: "higher labor costs because of capacity growth and labor tightness." And a consequent teenage unemployment rate that is 'excelsior.'

Basically, you're just boasting about how nice your farts smell - the only person that would believe your lies, propaganda and bullshit is already a leftie that would make the same lies, propaganda and bullshit.

Like your tiny rural Kansas nonsense last week, or euroland-Skandi's brand of socialism with small, homogeneous populations, you're a smart man to pick your self-serving lies & propaganda very selectively; you should write a policy paper all about it.

Tuttle, 4/5 drop in job growth doesn't mean fewer jobs. I thought you had a law degree. Apparently reading comprehension isn't required, just bullshittery.

Re-read your post, find the quote. : ) Your source is discussing the franchise industry from an investor perspective, and relates to "same store sales" which only matters to investors of *existing* companies and their already-existing stores. But in RL, the job market and the restaurant industry as a whole also includes the upstarts not publicly traded or part of the stock analysts' purview (except perhaps as a market force peripheral).

I'm living the 'oversupply' of restaurants, and the chief beneficiaries are labor (more new restaurants trying to hire the same small group of taco-makers), and customers with more choice; but not the *existing* stores, obviously, that are facing fresh competition from upstarts.

[Actually, I have not just the JD but also an MBA.]

Reminder, Forbes Sites is their blog platform. Anyone can set up an account and write a blog post.

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

In fact this author is a 'fellow at the Adam Smith Institute' and uses as a source a Reason Blog post that uses as it's source a Columnist at the SD Union Tribune.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...ge-job-losses-restaurants-20170406-story.html

Now as to the idea that b/c San Diego's restaurant job growth was less than California's thus Minimum Wage the data doesn't necessarily back that up. First of all, if you go to the original column you'll see that San Diego's restaurant job growth had lagged the rest of the states for most of the last 2 years. A full year and half before any differing minimum wage increase. In fact the only months it was higher than the state's was the six months after the first SD hike went into effect. So not a good control group nor does it really saw what people want it to say. Secondly it is very early to try and get solid results. Remember how after a few early 'results' (generally arbitrary data points taken out of context, like the above) market fundamentalists were crowing about how Seattle's Minimum Wage was killing jobs but once we had a time and some real studies the results have come back either minimal impacts on job growth or no impacts.

Is there a magic wall around publicly traded restaurant companies?

Consumer demand for restaurant fare is down. This was in 2016. Openings of new restaurants would reflect this unless restaurateurs failed their undergraduate macroeconomics classes. Reduced growth of new jobs for restaurant workers in San Diego would be a function of fewer new restaurant openings.

If you want to argue that higher wages are forestalling openings, or sending them elsewhere, you could, but the reduction in "foot traffic" mentioned in the article I quoted is national.

I give you high marks for misdirection and condescension.

Nah, you're wrong, about everything including the condescension. : (

Same store sales being down nationwide doesn't mean that, after you add on mom & pops and start ups flying beneath the radar, restaurant sales aren't flat or even up; and since the underlying point is whether minimum wages are beneficial to anyone other than the min wage worker (and there are good arguments that even the min wage worker is hurt when all factors are considered), and also whether a higher min wage reduces employment and/or raises prices. So you are the misdirecting entry, not me. I'm still on point. Min wages hurt more than they help, and Anc's case-study of seattle is nothing more than a few more bits of data that may or may not support his pov, if you could get an accurate picture of what's happening (not his typical agenda driven bullshit repeated, complete with hidden underlying biases).

Tuttle, all you've offered is opinion and insults: "agenda driven bullshit."

The blogger's point was restaurant employment was not up as much as it would have been, due to an increase of $1.00/hr to $11.50/hr over the state mandated $10.50/hr.

I've provided cites showing downward pressure on restaurant sales nationally. The link between fewer jobs food service jobs being created in San Diego and the rise in minimum wage has yet to be demonstrated.

How about backing up your opinions with credible sources? nah, that would take some thought and effort; you're just here for entertainment.

I saw another study about Seattle which said average hours worked had gone done among minimum wage workers.

New study released today:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lps-workers/?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.89c41fa31c33

My wife loves Seattle. Her family used to live in Tacoma so she went there a lot.

Yes, already posted earlier. On average low wage workers saw their work week decrease by 15 minutes a week while take home pay increased by $13 a week. So work less, take home more. THE HORROR!

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2997999-Seattle-Minimum-Wage-Final-Report.html

Interesting.

On the whole it seems to have a couple flaws (that I'm sure will come up once it is peer reviewed).

First is methodology, only looking at small firms with no locations outside the city. The majority of the low skilled labor force for restaurant work is fast food type establishments so not including them doesn't give you the full picture.

Second is more fundamental. It makes the same mistake as earlier work in treating low wage work as an inherent good. While there was less increase in hours for those making less than $19/h working in small firms compared to 'Synthetic Seattle' the increase in those making over $19/h was higher. In general that is a good thing. Question is if that is due to replacing lower skilled and paid positions with higher killed and paid or if paying lower skilled workers more. The former can be a problem (from a labor standpoint) if there aren't alternatives for workers to gain skills. Which is why a comprehensive look that considers larger firms would be useful.

So, more

The study quoted by WaPo said the average low paid worker in Seattle actually makes $125 per month less, numb nuts. As in they cut so many hours people are making less despite the increase in minimum wage.

You can keep declaring everything be an economic free ride but tgere are rarely free rides in economics.

That's the ideal, but you have to be careful with minimum wage increases.

In some industries it forces increased automation, which is good from a productivity point and, as long as there is enough replacement jobs, good for the worker.

It's also a double-edged sword in that larger businesses, with larger overall margins, can absorb the cost and helps then maintain their market whilst providing entry-level barriers for new competition, and smaller businesses with lower margins eventually have to price themselves above the larger competitors due to the larger ones have economies of scale.

The US has an advantage too, you've only really two nations that export workers, in the EU you find the minimum wage acts as a glass ceiling for youth workers as you can take a risk on paying an unknown quantity, or you can take a lesser risk on an economic migrant who may cost slightly more but comes with a verifiable work history and references. You get skilled east Europeans doing lower skilled work in western Europe for higher wages than the skilled work at home... Another negative in that we're strip mining talent from those nations.

These are why I prefer basic income schemes, you can provide a basic level of income without distorting the jobs market.