Home > Uncategorized > Eureka Fair Wage Act — What do people think?

Eureka Fair Wage Act — What do people think?

Here’s the text of the proposed Eureka Fair Wage Act https://www.box.com/s/3ad802141c0c0260f300.

The act would set $12 as the minimum wage for Eureka employers with 25 or more employees.

More information is here: http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/walmart-and-the-12-minimum-wage-frequently-asked-questions/

What do you think of the idea?

  1. November 26, 2012 at 8:01 am

    If this is going to be done, it should be County-wide including IHSS workers!

  2. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 8:16 am

    With a super majority in the state legislature, can’t the democrats just pass a law increasing the minimum wage?

  3. craig
    November 26, 2012 at 8:23 am

    Are we serious? The employers will just pass on the cost of the higher wages. Minimum wage is not meant to be living wage. It is a starting point, you work hard you get a raise. etc

  4. November 26, 2012 at 8:33 am

    Charlie Bean,

    Just speaking for myself (I am not an official spokesperson for the Eureka Fair Wage Act) I would welcome a county wide minimum wage effort, and if our effort succeeds in Eureka we will probably try to extend it county wide in the future. If you want to go forward immediately it will cost you $200 to file it. It will require something like 7-8,000 sigs I think for ballot access but you will have Arcata and that will make it easier. I will kick in a few bucks if you decide to go forward.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  5. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 8:40 am

    That’s the theory, but doesn’t work in practice any more, Craig. Working class people have seen a decline in their wages over the past few decades as income has concentrated at the top with the lowest tax rates in modern history. That increased wealth at the top came from the worker’s paychecks. That’s why steeply progressive tax rates are needed on high incomes. If they paid better wages and lowered their own incomes to qualify for lower taxes, the entire economy would improve – including their own. Working class people would pay a higher percent of taxes and require fewer social programs, reducing the deficit from both ends. Their increased spending would create more jobs and more profit for business.

  6. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 8:48 am

    Put another way, every reality based economist and business owner says our unemployment problem (and consequent low govt. revenues and increased entitlement spending) is due to lack of demand, not regulations or taxes. Businesses don’t hire or fire based on their tax rates but on demand for their service. When more people have more money to spend, demand increases. When a few people have massive increases in income while the vast majority have less, demand shrinks, unemployment increases, deficits increase and wealth concentrates more quickly at the top.

  7. November 26, 2012 at 8:57 am

    Think About It….

    We are told by people who want to keep wages low that raising the minimum wage will cause employers to lay off workers. We are told that a business that employs 100 workers @ $8 an hour has a wage expense of $800 an hour, and if those workers are paid $10.00 an hour then the company can only employ 80 workers for that hour.

    Well think about it. What is wrong with this picture? Well it leaves out company profits. The above scenario assumes of course that company profits are sacred and must be untouched. We have seen both the minimum wage and the average wages for American workers decline over the last 40 years. If the above scenario were true, there should have been an increase in employment rates because workers are cheaper! But instead we have the highest corporate profits in history and the highest unemployment in 75 years!

    That is because the increases in worker productivity over the last decades have been captured into corporate profits and have not been shared with workers. This is truly “redistribution of wealth” – from the working poor and middle class into the pockets of the rich corporate elite.

    The cost of labor is just one of the costs of production. Suppose that the company is making widgets, and each widget requires the company to purchase one thingamajig as a component to make the widget, and the thingamajigs cost $8.00 each. Suppose the thingamajig supplier announces a $2.00 price increase. Will the company then make only 80 widgets instead of 100? Of course not, because their profits would suffer. They will still have to buy 100 thingamajigs and spend the extra money. The same is true with employees. The company above is employing 100 employees because they need 100 employees to produce what they are producing. If you think that the company is employing 20 extra employees out of kindness you are mistaken. If they cut back on employees they will be cutting back on profits.

    Large companies and corporations have been so profitable for the last few years because they have been able to raise the prices for the goods they sell and they have been able to drive wages down. They can’t have it both ways.

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/think-about-it/

  8. November 26, 2012 at 9:08 am

    Just what we need. All the unemployed minimum wage workers within a couple hundred miles flocking to Eureka or the county.

  9. just a thought
    November 26, 2012 at 9:08 am

    My question is…. Why $12.00? On January 1 San Francisco’s will only be $10.55. It seems that a $4 jump is quite a lot.

  10. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 9:14 am

    Just Watchin :With a super majority in the state legislature, can’t the democrats just pass a law increasing the minimum wage?

    Eurekaworker: you seem to be the most knowledgable to answer my question. Could they? And I know that “moderate” democrats might not go along, but if they stuck together, could they pass a state wide law?

  11. A pesky fact
    November 26, 2012 at 9:17 am

    Ultimately, the economic problems faced in Humboldt County are caused by terrible governance and policy in Sacramento and DC.

    The starting point of any real solution must be recognition of the above fact.

    Maybe it’s time we have a serious adult discussion about splitting California?

    Shifting the min. Wage amount in Eureka isn’t going to do anything positive in aggregate, and very likely will do negative things. Sacramento’s policies have made running small profitable businesses nigh impossible.

  12. November 26, 2012 at 9:18 am

    What are you trying to say Fred? That minimum wage workers are undesirables? Please expand on your thoughts.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  13. jr
    November 26, 2012 at 9:22 am

    Minimum wage in 1968 was $2.35/hour. If for no other reason what would be the minimum wage today adjusted for inflation. Why not make inflation adjustment the reason for such an increase?

  14. A pesky fact
    November 26, 2012 at 9:25 am

    Additionally, CalPers and the other retirement systems are broke, some accounting gimmicks are holding up an illusion, but they are broke and will never be able to pay what was promised.

    It is better we address this now than later.

    Here is my partial proposal:
    1) city and county embrace Obamacare, pay the 2k per employee penalty, and let all the employees get their insurance from ObamaCare.
    2) drop insurance other than the above
    3) switch to defined contribution retirement instead of defined benefit
    4) figure out the yearly cost savings from the above (it will be massively significant on a per employee basis)
    5) split the difference. Employees get a raise of half the cost savings. The other half of the money goes to debt, or funding previous obligations, or whatever.

    The point is, if we kick the can much further down the road, we’ll run out of road and be in a volcano of fiery financial doom.

  15. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 9:28 am

    Sacramento’s business community, like every other business community globally, is suffering from lack of demand. Lack of demand is caused by high unemployment and low wages. When Washington State was debating whether an increase in minimum wage, making it significantly higher than in their neighboring states of Idaho and Oregon, there were dire predictions that unemployment would rise and small businesses close. Just the opposite actually occurred. Small businesses had to raise their prices a little to cover the increase in wages, but their profits went up an average of 11% and they had to hire more workers to meet the increased demand.

  16. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 9:30 am

    Many of the fixed costs of living have actually increased by much more than the official cost of living, Jr. Housing, health care and energy are biggies.

  17. November 26, 2012 at 9:33 am

    Why only for businesses with 25 or more people? Why not all of them.

  18. November 26, 2012 at 9:33 am

    Plain Jane,
    Energy and food are not even included in the “cost of living” statistics…

  19. Laughing
    November 26, 2012 at 9:36 am

    Why $12 an hour? Make the new minimum wage at $25 and eliminate poverty all together.

    After all you all say it won’t cost jobs, those evil corporations make too much money anyway and that businesses don’t hire or fire based upon cost but on demand.

  20. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 9:43 am

    Laughing isn’t even clever with its straw man idiocy.

  21. November 26, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Here you go “Laughing”. BTW this is from the FAQ that is linked in this post above. I know you are too busy creating jobs to go there so I will repost a small portion of it here. This is just more Freeper bullspit but it is in our FAQ becuase it is always the first argument out of some idiot’s mouth.

    Q. If a $12.00 an hour minimum wage is so good for the economy, why don’t we just make it $50.00 an hour?

    A. First of all, we are not asking for $50.00 an hour, your question is a red herring. Secondly, what we say, and what the research has proved, is that a modest rise in the minimum wage produces a modest gain in the local economy, regardless of the minimum wage in surrounding regions.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  22. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Right, Mark. But people still have to pay the higher costs so increasing minimum wage to adjusted official cost of living increases wouldn’t give them the same earning power they had in 1968.

  23. Laughing
    November 26, 2012 at 9:47 am

    Plain Jane :
    Laughing isn’t even clever with its straw man idiocy.

    Then why $12 an hour? $2.35 in 1968 is $15.53 inflation adjusted today.

    Do you ever answer tough questions?

  24. November 26, 2012 at 9:54 am

    @Mark Sailors this is off our blog Mark

    The Tiered Minimum Wage in Theory and Practice

    The theory behind the tiered minimum wage (and here we refer to a two tiered minimum wage, increased only for larger employers, not for smaller employers) is clear. Many recent studies have shown that the majority of minimum wage workers work for very large businesses with adequate financial resources to pay a high minimum wage of $12.00 to $15.00 an hour. We are in an era of extraordinarily high corporate profits, and it coincides with an era when workers are getting the smallest percentage in wages of the value of the product of their labor in a half century. We call the large employers the formal economy.

    Smaller businesses, that we call the informal economy, are family & friends businesses for the most part. When we talk about raising the minimum wage it is important to remember that it is not only small business owners who resist raising the minimum wage, but it is often employees of these small businesses who also oppose us. Both of them are fearful of business failure and loss of employment. This is the practice part. It is our experience that this fear cannot be overcome. Thus we in the minimum wage movement must honor this informal economy (both the business people and the employees) and give exemption to smaller businesses in minimum wage laws and ordinances. Yes it is a compromise, but there are a certain number of people who want and enjoy flexibility in their work arrangements and alternative wage arrangements and find them in the informal small business context. This is a historic compromise between the idea of government regulation of business and deregulation. In this case, large businesses are regulated, while small businesses are deregulated.

    With this understanding we then need to ask “What is a small business?” When we started our dialog here in Eureka at the beginning of the Eureka Fair Wage Act campaign our initial figure was 100 employees. Through discussion with fellow activists and other community groups including organised labor our figure was soon reduced to 25 employees. It seemed to stick there. And now that we are out in the community it is a figure that seems to raise very little controversy. The number 25 employees or more seems to resonate with the public as a reasonable distinction between a small business and a large business.

    So if there is a sweet spot, a Goldilocks number, a magic number for two tiered minimum wage proposals, it is likely somewhere between 20 and 50. It is interesting that Santa Fe New Mexico, with its increased minimum wage, has an exemption for less than 25 employees as well. We arrived at that same number through independent means.

    It has been very easy to get signatures in support of the two-tiered minimum wage. We are almost certain we will make the ballot in March with it. By going to a two-tier minimum wage we have assuaged a good portion of the concern from the small business community. Indeed, many of them start to see higher wages for large enterprises as a benefit for smaller local businesses. This is a wedge issue, but it is the people’s wedge issue.

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/593/

  25. November 26, 2012 at 9:58 am

    Has anyone done a survey to examine how many businesses this would affect, and what types of businesses they are? Has anyone determined how many below $12 employees exist in Eureka businesses with 25 or more employees?

    I’d imagine different categories of businesses will have different profit margins, different levels of labor incorporated into what they provide, and different abilities to pick up and move to, say, McKinleyville or Fortuna.

  26. November 26, 2012 at 9:59 am

    highboldtage :
    What are you trying to say Fred? That minimum wage workers are undesirables? .
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    I’d suggest that current minimum wage workers in the area don’t want a bunch of other minimum wage workers flocking to the area competing for their jobs.

    What they would like to see come to the area, as do at least some of the rest of us, is more employers. Requiring employers to pay more for labor is not a selling point for those thinking of coming here.

    Employers coming to the area is good. More minimum wage workers coming to the area, especially with declining job opportunities is not good.

  27. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 10:16 am

    Just Watchin :

    Just Watchin :With a super majority in the state legislature, can’t the democrats just pass a law increasing the minimum wage?

    Eurekaworker: you seem to be the most knowledgable to answer my question. Could they? And I know that “moderate” democrats might not go along, but if they stuck together, could they pass a state wide law?

    Can ANYONE answer my question?? On a blog where everyone seems to be an expert on everything, I would think that someone might have an answer.

  28. November 26, 2012 at 10:17 am

    Well Fred I can tell you I have talked to hundreds of minimum wage workers in the last several months and it may surprise you (or perhaps not) that you are completely wrong about this. The vast vast majority want to make $12 an hour and they are not worried about hordes of competition moving here to compete for their McJobs.

    When I ask these people if they want to sign the petition they don’t just say “Yeah” they say “$12 an hour? HELL YEAH!”

  29. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 10:20 am

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/business/yourmoney/17costco.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all&

    Fred, ultimately our employers are the customers who pay for our services. New business doesn’t stimulate demand and who wants to start a business when there is little demand?

    Moving is very expensive and few minimum wage workers, especially those who are out of work, have the money required to relocate. Your concern over the welfare of our local minimum wage force is less than an a convincing argument for keeping their wages below the cost of living.

  30. November 26, 2012 at 10:22 am

    Just Watchin,

    Yes the California legislature can raise the state minimum wage at any time, and they have in the past. I hope they do.

    On the other hand, in the recent San Jose campaign (where raising the minimum wage won resoundingly) the Chamber of Comnerce used the argument that raising the minimum wage should be done statewide and not locally. Of course they make this argument well aware of the gridlock in Sacramento.

    We are not waiting for the politicians. Working people need help and the Walmart cancer is eating at our community. We can act locally.

  31. November 26, 2012 at 10:37 am

    @craig

    The meme that the minimum wage was created to help “teenagers” and “entry level” workers is an outright lie that is circulated by Freepers and Kockheads. It is not supported by the facts that most minimum wage workers are adults in terminal occupations. I am not saying you are a liar I am suggusting that you should stop propagating it. It is a lie.

    The reality is that the minimum wage was and always has been a floor of dignity below which no honest laborer should descend. When it’s purchasing power is protected and expanded the lives of workers and the economy of the community are improved.

  32. Anonymous
    November 26, 2012 at 10:46 am

    It’s fair to say that a certain number of employers, who have the right clientele, will move out of Eureka.

  33. HUUFC
    November 26, 2012 at 10:49 am

    There is no gridlock in Sacramento. The democrats control both houses and we have a Brown Governor. When the new session is installed they will have a super majority and can continue to destroy California at will, and faster.
    A pesky fact is doing a good job explaining the problem.

  34. November 26, 2012 at 10:53 am

    Name one business that will leave Eureka because they have to pay $12 an hour minimum wage, and tell us where they might move to. Fortuna? Redding? Brookings? Nevada? China?

  35. Anonymous
    November 26, 2012 at 10:53 am

    Fred Mangels :
    Just what we need. All the unemployed minimum wage workers within a couple hundred miles flocking to Eureka or the county.

    Oh sure that’s gonna happen because we will be the home of high wages (?) and unlimited jobs. Fred you should have your morning coffee before you start to respond to posts. Or maybe you just like to see you stuff in print whether it makes sense or not. Never mind!!

  36. November 26, 2012 at 10:57 am

    Minimum wage was not “$2.35” in 1968, Hell, I remember it was $2.00 in 1974.

  37. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 10:59 am

    Thanks for the answer Eurekaworker, although I do question the reference to “the gridlock in Sacramento” with the super majority. For a state that prides itself as being at the forefront of liberal thinking and helping the working poor, I’m surprised the democrats wouldn’t seize the opportunity. Maybe it’s the old “be careful what you ask for…..you just might get it”. Failure can’t be blamed on Republican obstructionism anymore.

  38. November 26, 2012 at 10:59 am

    The Gasoline Index

    In 1968 an hour’s pay at minimum wage ( $1.60) would buy almost 5 gallons of gasoline (@ $0.33/ gal.) but today in Eureka an hour’s minimum wage ($8.00) will buy a little less than 2 gallons of gasoline (@ $4.37 per gallon.)

    If the minimum wage had been increased at the same rate as the price of gas, the minimum wage would be over $21.00 per hour today.

    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html

  39. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 11:01 am

    moviedad :Minimum wage was not “$2.35″ in 1968, Hell, I remember it was $2.00 in 1974.

    I had a job in 1970 that was $1.75 per hour. I actually have an old pay stub.

  40. jr
    November 26, 2012 at 11:17 am

    It is astounding that the minimum wage has not kept up with inflation, let along those components that are not figured in to the equation (housing, health care and energy). Using the current rate of $8.00/hour, what would the minimum wage have been in 1968 subtracting inflation? .05/hour maybe?

  41. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 11:18 am

    In 1960 you could buy a house for less than $15,000.

  42. HUUFC
    November 26, 2012 at 11:18 am

    $2.00 per hour day shift, $2.50 graveyard shift at the gasoline station 1974 Las Vegas Nevada.

  43. jr
    November 26, 2012 at 11:22 am

    Just Watchin: You are correct about the wage being $1.70/hour. So, what would be the wage now with inflation taking into consideration?

  44. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 11:28 am

    jr :Just Watchin: You are correct about the wage being $1.70/hour. So, what would be the wage now with inflation taking into consideration?

    jr……. not sure. That would take way more time and research, but I’m sure some on here could come up with a number.

  45. November 26, 2012 at 11:31 am

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-28/minimum-wage-in-u-s-fails-to-beat-inflation-chart-of-the-day.html

    The CHART OF THE DAY shows that after adjusting for inflation, the federal minimum wage dropped 20 percent from 1967 to 2010, even as the nominal figure climbed to $7.25 an hour from $1.40, a 418 percent gain.

  46. November 26, 2012 at 11:47 am

    charles hugh smith http://www.oftwominds.com/blogmay12/restore-min-wage5-12.html

    Actually, it’s easily addressed with one simple act: restore the minimum wage to its 1969 level, and adjust it for the inflation that has been officially under-reported. If you go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator and plug in $1.60 (the minimum wage in 1969 when I started working summers in high school) and select the year 1969, you find that in 2012 dollars the minimum wage should be $10 per hour if it were to match the rate considered “reasonable” 43 years ago, when the nation was significantly less wealthy and much less productive.

    The current Federal minimum wage is $7.25, though states can raise it at their discretion. State rates runs from $7.25 to $8.25, with Washington state the one outlier at $9.04/hour.

    In 40 years of unparalleled wealth and income creation, the U.S. minimum wage has declined by roughly a third in real terms. “Official” measures of inflation have been gamed and massaged for decades to artificially lower the rate, for a variety of reasons: to mask the destructiveness to purchasing power of Federal Reserve policy, to lower the annual cost-of-living increases to Social Security recipients, and to generally make inept politicians look more competent than reality would allow.

    The full extent of this gaming is open to debate, but let’s assume inflation has been under-reported by about 1% per year for the past two decades. That would suggest the minimum wage should be adjusted upward by about 20%, from $10 to $12/hour.

    All those claiming such an increase will destroy the nation (or equivalent hyperbole) need to explain how the nation survived the prosperous 1960s paying the equivalent of $10-$12/hour in minimum wage. Exactly what has weakened the economy such that the lowest paid workers must bear the brunt of wage cuts?

  47. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    “The full extent of this gaming is open to debate, but let’s assume inflation has been under-reported by about 1% per year for the past two decades. That would suggest the minimum wage should be adjusted upward by about 20%, from $10 to $12/hour”
    Eurekaworker……. seems to me that making an assumption just to justify the $12 / hr. figure doesn’t do much for your credibility. Could opponents make the assumption that inflation has been over reported, and therefore $8 / hr. is more in line?

  48. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 12:03 pm

    They don’t leave out the cost of housing, medical care and energy from their COLA equation because it would skew the results in favor of minimum wage workers, Eurekaworks.

  49. November 26, 2012 at 12:06 pm

    What do I think of the idea? To quiet the ever rambling mind is tricky as we over intellect the problem and not let it take care of its self after we have decided on a plan.

    So, if one puts into action the thought and “lets” it manifest with the intention, and we, not the architect of every detail, we’ll be surprised what comes our way. Our desire if kept in mind, and not a hundred other conflictions, we attain the goal with ease and less doubt.

  50. November 26, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    Yes Just Watchin you could make the assumption that inflation has been overcalculated instead of undercalculated , but go back and read #38, who would believe you? You are off in right wing cuckoo land.

  51. November 26, 2012 at 12:10 pm

    eurekaworker,

    Among things that have changed substantially over the past forty years or so is the ease with which jobs can be shipped overseas. Another is the passage of free trade agreements.

    Are these changes things that need to be taken into account when talking about the minimum wage?

    And what about the difference between a national or state minimum wage and that for a single locality? Are there differences relevant to what works and what doesn’t?

    These are questions I think Eureka voters will need to explore to make an informed choice. I don’t pretend to know enough about these issues to know what the answers are.

    I do know that the effect of closing a door is different in a windowless room with one door than in a room with lots of open doors and windows. People who feel strongly that the room’s doors should be closed might argue to close the first open door they come to — after all, that’s a start — but the effectiveness of that approach depends a lot on the room, not just on the first open door.

  52. November 26, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    Thom Hartmann is discussing Walmart and the minimum wage McConomy right now on KGOE 1480 AM. Tune in. He is a smart person.

  53. November 26, 2012 at 12:30 pm

    Bill,
    I don’t know how you maintain your energy level – a tip o’ the hat to you.

  54. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    eurekaworker :Yes Just Watchin you could make the assumption that inflation has been overcalculated instead of undercalculated , but go back and read #38, who would believe you? You are off in right wing cuckoo land.

    I took no position on an opposite assumption, just posed the question and you call me a right wing kook. What is it with you libtards? Do all of you have comprehension issues?

  55. HoDeHoDeHum
    November 26, 2012 at 1:02 pm

    YOU ARE A RIGHT WING KOOK, YOU RIGHT WING KOOK!

    November 25, 2012 at 5:58 am | #14 Just Watchin

    Quote

    Anonymous……I may be a Republican, but my opinions are not always with the party line. For example, I’m O.K. with abortion. As a matter of fact, I believe abortion should be mandatory for pregnant women with two or more children who are collecting any form of welfare.

  56. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 1:08 pm

    HoDe…..why do you have a problem with that? You libtards consider an aborted fetus as little more than a piece of trash. A woman with 6 children and 5 different “babydaddies” is enough of a drain on society already.

  57. Loofa
    November 26, 2012 at 1:14 pm

    Jes’ Watchin’ the funny Humboldt libtards from the comfort of my veranda? in the safety of my mansion? in the florida panhandle. More funnier than watchin the bug zapper on a Saturday night. Booya! But thats fun too.

  58. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Is anyone surprised that he didn’t use a fundamentalist wife of a minimum wage worker with 10 kids as his example?

  59. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 1:44 pm

    You barely scratch the surface of people like that and see the authoritarian racist shine through.

  60. Just Watchin
    November 26, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    PJ….. I wasn’t talking to you. When I want your opinion, I’ll pour a bowl of Purina and signal you with a high pitched whistle.

  61. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    And the silly goober thinks my posts were directed to him.

  62. November 26, 2012 at 3:33 pm

    People are working 34- 60 hours a week, making millions or billions of dollars FOR large corporations, and the workers can’t afford rent, food, healthcare, etc. You don’t need to be an analyst, a genius, a “liberal”, or even one of those workers to know that raising the minimum wage must happen. $12 an hour for an individual working 34 hours a week brings that person just over the federal poverty line. If you think Walmart, Target, the City, Pacific Choice Seafoods and other large employers should keep working people like they do for 8 bucks an hour, and that these employers can’t afford to pay more, you have been indoctrinated into the “Profits Over People” mindset and your humanity has been usurped by corporations; worried about how the corp will do, but not the people who work their bodies and minds so the corp thrives. If the slave plantation owner cannot keep things going without slaves, too bad; the plantation should fold (and the land go to the workers/slaves). People deserve more, and we’ll keep working toward that end. People doing those jobs “shipped overseas” as well as enslaved in U.S. prisons doing tons of manual and service work deserve more. They have similar interests with workers in Eureka and everywhere- neo-liberalism and capitalism are the only things that would lead someone to pit those people against each other.

    And the good news is, all the news is good when wages go up!

  63. November 26, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    Actually, I ran out of desire to pay any attention to JW with his comments on the Tennessee Republican Family Values thread.

    No adjectives needed, as they speak for themselves.

  64. November 26, 2012 at 3:43 pm

    eurekaworker, I confess your team has got me interested here, where I didn’t think I would be.

    I read over discussion on some other places that are trying this, and there may actually be a level at which it can work, calculated between the frictions that keep a business in place and those open windows and doorways Mitch very properly concerns about. Economics is no-one’s linear game.

    I would be very happy, personally speaking, for the improvement in life of locals if this can be made to work.

    Grandfathering true small business is a very wise move. And if the better wage becomes widespread, that has its own slower tendency to get improvement there too – as demand goes up.

    Tieing the figure to a base and proportion on factors voters can recognize does seem it could be a practical move. Open-ended flat rates have their risks, and everybody knows.it.

    I especially appreciate the comments drawing out how persons may see their self-interest in deeper terms than a simple rate hike can answer.

    But again, it would be wonderful to see something like this become practical and approved, for the benefit.

  65. November 26, 2012 at 4:06 pm

    It became practical and approved in three cities this month. Albuquerque, San Jose and Long Beach, with local variations.

    The local fair wage movement is an international movement and growing.

    This is Eureka’s chance to make a national impact in a very positive way, we are on the very tip of the wave.

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/major-victories-for-working-people-voters-raise-the-minimum-wage-in-three-cities/

    Major Victories for Working People – Voters Raise the Minimum Wage in Three Cities!

    San Jose 3-2 margin, Albuquerque and Long Beach 2-1 margin!

  66. November 26, 2012 at 4:11 pm

    I abstain.

  67. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 4:24 pm

    Walmart clothing found in Bangladeshi factory after fire that killed 112

    “Reminiscent of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire, the Bangladeshi factory lacked enough emergency exits, and some of the 112 people who died did so after jumping out of the eight-story building to escape the fire. Walmart had given the factory an “orange” safety rating in May 2011, which means that even by Walmart’s low standards, there were significant risks. Walmart is touting that inspection program, and saying that it has cut ties with 50 factories in Bangladesh recently.”

    But, Josh Eidelson writes:

    [I]n a Monday interview, Workers Rights Consortium Executive Director Scott Nova said Walmart’s “culpability is enormous. First of all they are the largest buyer from Bangladesh” and so “they make the market.” Nova said Bangladesh has become the world’s second-largest apparel supplier “because they’ve given Walmart and its competitors what they want, which is the cheapest possible labor costs.”
    “So Walmart is supporting, is incentivizing, an industry strategy in Bangladesh: extreme low wages, non-existent regulation, brutal suppression of any attempt by workers to act collectively to improve wages and conditions,” Nova told The Nation. “This factory is a product of that strategy that Walmart invites, supports, and perpetuates.”

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/26/1164800/-Walmart-clothing-found-in-Bangladeshi-factory-after-fire-that-killed-112

  68. November 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm

    @Mitch

    You asked several questions. Not meaning to ignore you but someone called me a libtard and I went off and had a good cry. I feel better now.

    First, yes we know who the large employers are in this town. We did the research (James Decker did the bulk of it) and we made a list of them. This info is available online publicly and can be compiled from several sources.

    From this we inferred an estimate of 1200 or so workers who will be covered.

    also you ask

    “Among things that have changed substantially over the past forty years or so is the ease with which jobs can be shipped overseas. Another is the passage of free trade agreements.

    Are these changes things that need to be taken into account when talking about the minimum wage?”

    No. Not until we catch up with other modern industrial nations like Australia, France, Germany, Sweden et al. They all have higher minimum wages than we do, and less poverty.

  69. first world is the problem
    November 26, 2012 at 5:14 pm

    This is a bullshit proposal being used to field response. The information and dialect used among all parties is being studied for future commercial (political) purposes.

  70. Mitch
    November 26, 2012 at 7:46 pm

    eurekaworker,

    People don’t realize how their comments affect delicate egos. Thank you for sharing your pain.

  71. November 26, 2012 at 8:03 pm

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46979745/#49955297

    Listen to this 12+ minute video (at the 3 minute mark)

  72. November 26, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    Link 71 not working – sorry

  73. November 26, 2012 at 8:11 pm

    http://tv.msnbc.com/shows/melissa-harris-perry/

    View: “Walmart downplays labor pushback”

  74. Cutten Resident
    November 26, 2012 at 8:51 pm

    74 posts in one day is a good indication that this is a relevant news issue, despite the censorship by this area’s media.

  75. Plain Jane
    November 26, 2012 at 9:08 pm

    Good find, Charles. So why does a company that makes $16 billion in profits not pay their workers enough to survive without govt. benefits? Why does a family that makes more per year than the entire bottom 50% fund political agendas to cut funding for the social programs their workers and their customers need to survive? Why do we allow a corporation to exploit their workers and the taxpayers as they increase their market share and power over the global retail markets and manufacturers?

  76. Anonymouse
    November 26, 2012 at 9:21 pm

    eurekaworker :
    @craig
    The meme that the minimum wage was created to help “teenagers” and “entry level” workers is an outright lie that is circulated by Freepers and Kockheads. It is not supported by the facts that most minimum wage workers are adults in terminal occupations. I am not saying you are a liar I am suggusting that you should stop propagating it. It is a lie.
    The reality is that the minimum wage was and always has been a floor of dignity below which no honest laborer should descend. When it’s purchasing power is protected and expanded the lives of workers and the economy of the community are improved.

    A lot of hot air from you making a lot of unsupported claims. But you have no link to any sites with actual hard core statistics only opinion.

  77. November 26, 2012 at 9:30 pm

    Plain Jane :
    Good find, Charles. So why does a company that makes $16 billion in profits not pay their workers enough to survive without govt. benefits? Why does a family that makes more per year than the entire bottom 50% fund political agendas to cut funding for the social programs their workers and their customers need to survive? Why do we allow a corporation to exploit their workers and the taxpayers as they increase their market share and power over the global retail markets and manufacturers?

    I actually watched in Sunday morning. There is another part referring to Costco demonstrating the difference in expenses is higher, yet the return in the long run is better with improved sales, longer retention of employees, more with health plans, and still, they make money.

    http://www.vizettes.com/perspectives/tc/walmart/walmart-vs-costco.htm

    Too bad the County would not consider the benefits of higher wage for 1400 Care Providers – It would probably get what they expend and more in taxes – LOL

  78. November 26, 2012 at 10:06 pm

    If you want links that support what we say go to our blog http://fairwages.org there are enough links there to satisfy your thirst for credibility and balance. Then go take a look at craig’s blog and report back to us.

  79. Cutten Resident
    November 26, 2012 at 11:39 pm

    “Freepers and Kochheads”?

    Wow, I’m on the wrong blog…where’s the “Craig” blog?

    Who says desperate times can’t provide sharp, witty, and dangerous fun?

    U.S. Department of Labor stats since the 1930’s show drops in unemployment following every minimum wage increase except when the soldiers returned from WWII.

    It’s long-past the time that naysayers, whiners, fence-sitters, and Mitch, should start providing ANY economic statistics that show how rising numbers of U.S. families working in full-time destitution, (hocking landfill-ready bobbles), provide increasing benefits to the nation.

    Under the guise of caring for the tens of millions of workers who can barely afford shelter and food, Walmart may soon launch their first worker-dorms that deduct housing and food charges from employee’s paychecks, (a practice that has successfully kept migrant workers in poverty for generations in the U.S. and China).

    It could signal the repatriation of manufacturing jobs, factory fires, and child labor to the U.S….”economic nirvana” delivered by WalMart!?

  80. November 27, 2012 at 1:54 am

    Yesterday’s most hilarious @61, thanks Plain Jane!

  81. Mitch
    November 27, 2012 at 7:00 am

    “It’s long-past the time that naysayers, whiners, fence-sitters, and Mitch, should start providing ANY economic statistics that show how rising numbers of U.S. families working in full-time destitution, (hocking landfill-ready bobbles), provide increasing benefits to the nation.”

    No statistics are necessary. After sufficient destitution, people are easier to eat. Especially the babies, who are almost always delicious. You’re welcome.

  82. first world is the problem
    November 27, 2012 at 8:59 am

    “People don’t realize how their comments affect delicate egos.”

    YOU don’t realize how these comments don’t affect YOU at all. Same with Eric. YOU two haven’t demonstrated ANY sort of falter from the same complacent bullshit you all were spouting almost ten years ago! That goes for everybody at the NCJ as well as their affiliate media and government and business. You all say the same thing, “we all need to agree on something” but you all aren’t doing squat. Patting eachother on the back and huffing nonsense about manners.

  83. November 27, 2012 at 9:27 am

    MINIMUM WAGE FOR LARGE EMPLOYERS

    EUREKA FAIR WAGE ACT CAMPAIGN

    Meeting Tuesday Night @ the Labor Temple, Eureka 615 PM

    Do you want to raise wages for 1,000 of Eureka’s hardest working people?

    Do you want to counter Walmart’s unwelcome invasion of Eureka?

    You are invited to our meeting @ the Labor Temple on E St in Eureka.

    That’s the nice yellow building kitty korner from the wreck of the Downtowner @ 9th & E.

    We meet @ 615PM.

    We usually meet in the basement, occasionally upstairs. Please look around for us.

    We are planning our campaign to win the vote next year.

    We welcome community involvement.

    YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

    Your skill set is needed!

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact: James Decker (707) 442-7465

    info@fairwages.org

    http://fairwages.org

  84. November 27, 2012 at 10:32 am

    Mitch,

    Check out my URL.

    This is what I tried, and failed, to express earlier in the thread.

    The exact number varies state by state, but the point is this: the economic problem and drag we are experiencing is not a matter of minimum wage.

    The terrible irony of this thread: raising a full time MW worker’s pay to 12/h, 24k/y pre-tax, will price almost all of them out of public benefits, resulting in a net economic harm to them.

    I’m willing to even let slide the matter of “does it help the economy or not” and just concede the point entirely, because the real issue is fundamentally larger and different.

  85. A pesky fact
    November 27, 2012 at 10:38 am

    PJ hit the nail on the head.

    The real issue is wage in relationship to bennies.

    The whole host of bennies we have serve primarily as a form of corporate welfare, not individual welfare. Allowing corps to engage in certain labor practices that they otherwise would not/could not.

    But I say again, if this goes thru, it will actually hurt workers as individuals. 24k/y will price them out of many California bennies.

  86. November 27, 2012 at 10:53 am

    “YOU two haven’t demonstrated ANY sort of falter from the same complacent bullshit you all were spouting almost ten years ago!”

    I’ve only been spouting complacent bullshit at the Herald for a couple of years at most. Please don’t exaggerate.

    I’ve kept my opinion about raising Eureka’s minimum wage to myself, because I realize I don’t have enough information to have a useful opinion and I don’t even live in Eureka. But apparently that’s as bad as actually disagreeing with your opinion.

    The only thing worse than doing nothing is doing the wrong thing because you haven’t thought things through. I’m not saying that applies here, but there will always be people with shared goals but different opinions about the tactics that accomplish the goals. It’s always seemed to me to be a particular talent of the “progressive community” to take wannabe allies and alienate them when they fail to pass a purity test.

    For the record, I wish Heraldo were still contributing at his/her/their old frequency. But sometimes people have other things to do. I’m completely serious when I suggest that people write to Heraldo if they’d like the ability to post here. I’ll also remind people that if you have local news and put it at Quick Notes, it will migrate to the front page if it seems important and Eric or I come across it.

  87. Plain Jane
    November 27, 2012 at 11:07 am

    Increasing the minimum wage means more money in the pockets of people who spend their income almost entirely on Main Street and actually creates jobs and increases business profits. Most people, if given the choice, would prefer to earn a living wage than receive taxpayer funded benefits. Personally, I would like to see tax policy that sets tax rates based on a formula that encourages employers to pay good wages rather than hoard the profits. Tax policies should be based on what works best for the most and pays the bills, even if they have to give tax cuts to companies to meet a ratio of executive/labor/shareholder earnings for the good of the country and our economy. Rich people don’t have money printing machines. The increased concentration of wealth at the top came from the paychecks of workers which undeniably has had a devastating effect on the working class and our deficit.

  88. Abraxis
    November 27, 2012 at 11:18 am

    A pesky fact :

    But I say again, if this goes thru, it will actually hurt workers as individuals. 24k/y will price them out of many California bennies.

    You don’t give a f— about workers, pesky. You are a conservative who wants to preserve the current welfare system? HA ha ha.

    You have argued in other threads to CUT and GUT what you call “entitlements.” But you argue in favor of them to prevent actual wages being raised.

    So in reality you want NO minimum wage and NO “welfare” eg Social Security and Medicare.

    This is infantile thinking and a totally bogus argument. Anyone can see through it.

  89. Restaurant Owner
    November 27, 2012 at 11:21 am

    Most of you have never tried to run a business. Restaurants have more employees than most businesses by their nature. They have a very low profit margin. In my restaurant the lowest paid worker gets $15 dollars/hour even thought they are minimum wage. That would be out dish washers. Waitresses on a good day can make $100 hour. Think about how much you tip. That tip is spread to the cooks, bussers and dish washers. It would be a real hardship on a restaurant that needs 30 to 50 employees to keep a restaurant running 2 shifts 7 days a week. It sounds good on paper but there would be a lot of restaurant closing in Eureka and opening in Arcata. Eureka already looks like a ghost town with all the empty store fronts and it is only going to get worse.

  90. A pesky fact
    November 27, 2012 at 11:27 am

    Abraxis, did you look at the URL I linked?

  91. Plain Jane
    November 27, 2012 at 11:32 am

    People who are already making $15 an hour due to tips should be excluded; however, most minimum wage workers don’t get tips so making them suffer because some restaurant workers get tips is ridiculous. It’s nice that your employees make enough that we the taxpayers aren’t subsidizing your profits. It’s time for the rest to do the same.

  92. Sonny Fortuna
    November 27, 2012 at 11:33 am

    Where is your joint? $100 an hour? My sister needs a job. She can’t make that much trimming.

  93. Abraxis
  94. Anonymouse
    November 27, 2012 at 12:42 pm

    The question has been asked before and nobody in favor of the increase has dared to try & answer it.

    Why $12 an hour? Why not $10 or $15 or even higher? What is the rationale for the amount you want to change it to?

  95. November 27, 2012 at 12:49 pm

    pesky,

    I’m genuinely bewildered by the argument you are making. Are you saying that it’s better for Wal-mart to pay lower wages so that people can get welfare benefits?

    Or are you complaining about the stupidity of sharp rather than gradual cutoffs for benefit programs, which make people worse off if they get a raise at their job. If the latter (and if you’re correct), I agree that’s a stupid and counterproductive system.

    But I feel that anyone who is working a 40 hour work week should be earning enough that they don’t need welfare benefits. In fact, that seems pretty much a no-brainer as a rule for a workable society. There will be people who will need to work at sheltered workshops, of course, but if a society normally generates jobs where employing a healthy individual for 40 hours per week does not generate sufficient value that they can be paid enough to rise off welfare, the society is in deep trouble.

    I’d be for raising the federal minimum wage to $12 in a flash, combined with increasing taxation on American companies that shift work overseas, and otherwise making it more difficult for American capital to flee the American labor market.

    My question is not whether a $12 minimum wage is fair and appropriate — my question is whether implementing it only in one small city is more likely to help the workers of that city or more likely to shift jobs from that city to its easily accessed neighbors.

  96. November 27, 2012 at 12:51 pm

    $12.00 is what we feel the minimum wage should be at to restore its real purchasing power circa 1968. Its been asked and answered in several ways right here on this thread but thanks for asking again. Maybe you should read the FAQ in the link for starters.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  97. Just Watchin
    November 27, 2012 at 12:52 pm

    Seems odd that people on welfare worry about taxpayers having to subsidize a company’s profits, although I suppose that it would reduce the dollars that they can get thier hands on.

  98. November 27, 2012 at 1:12 pm

    In seems odd that a conservative would like taxpayers subsidizing the costs for private for profit businesses, while the owners of the business reap the profits.

    On the other hand, that is the very definition of fascism and the way that a fascist thinks.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  99. November 27, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Just Watchin,

    Why might someone worry about the taxpayer subsidizing a private company’s profits? That’s an easy one.

    Companies will always seek to externalize their costs. Once one figures out the trick to doing this with labor costs, they will have a competitive advantage against others. The others will learn the trick or fail in the competition with the company that has learned it.

    Walmart has learned the trick, paying retail wages about 10% or more under the industry standard, and having their employees take advantage of taxpayer funded antipoverty programs. The rest of retail, to compete, will follow, unless Walmart is somehow prevented from continuing this approach.

    That’s why government floors on wage rates are so critical. Left to their own devices, corporations will seek to pay their labor the least they can find people willing to take, so that they can maximize shareholder return, which is their task. If people become willing to bid their labor at below poverty level, that’s what they will be paid. If government is concerned with people starving, it will then step in with public assistance programs.

    A better approach is to state that the bidding for labor has to start at a floor that is sufficient for working people to live a simple but comfortable life. Once upon a time, that meant one union wage earner per family. Now, for people in most jobs, it means two adults working per family. How that regression can have happened during the huge rise in productivity that has taken place in the last half century will make for interesting histories.

  100. A pesky fact
    November 27, 2012 at 1:19 pm

    Mitch,

    My argument is basicly this

    1) in the grand scheme what we do locally doesn’t really matter because the real problem is sac/DC

    2) we should do what us concretely best for our local workers

    3) because of the above 2 principles, combined with the ZH article I linked earlier, I think that raising up to 12 would concretely hurt local workers

    4) jumping them from 17k/y to 24k/y will likely cost them more than 7k in bennies because of the way Cali does means testing

  101. November 27, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    Mitch, one more thing to consider is that persons working for low wages too often also don’t get 40 hours of work for their week.

    As an example, there’s already a buzz about for employers to limit below 30 hours/week to avoid falling under the upcoming ACA requirement.

    I think prior to this, there’s been a fuzzy under-32-hours fault line for considering an employee part-time, and thus non-eligible for benefits.

    In any case, all the more reason to up the minimum wage — subject to the existence of some threshold level where employers really will lower employment because of it. That’s the tricky point. I am still trying to understand the degree to which the fairwages/eurekaworker crew are being responsible about this — hard to tell amongst the aggressive side of the voices.

  102. November 27, 2012 at 1:25 pm

    pesky,

    I understand your argument; I just find it really hard to believe that people will be negatively impacted by getting a raise. If that’s the case, I’d expect to have heard the loud screaming about the stupidity of the way California gates public assistance. But maybe that’s foolishly optimistic on my part.

    (Yes, I looked at what you linked.)

  103. November 27, 2012 at 1:38 pm

    I think it is a bit foolish to expect that, for several reasons (it’s too complicated for many, it creates a permanent class of democratic voters, it subsidizes the jobs-to-fight-poverty-endlessly-machine, newspapers greatly benefit from this too, especially corporate ones, and many more).

    There is an entire side of the political spectrum that has been pointing out since the 1960s the terrible terrible approach used to public assistance. Since at least 64 the US has spent more fighting poverty each year than it would cost to do direct financial redistribution to families in poverty, lifting them out of it.

    Some reasonable metrics suggest that 60k-ish per year is spent to “fighting poverty” for each family in actual poverty.

    The point is this: I checked some various charts for means tested programs in Cali. EBT, head start, section 8, other childcare, various healthcare (esp. For kids).

    It’s quite possible that a 7k increase in wages will cost the recipients more than 7k in bennies, making them objectively financially worse off.

    Is the whole thing just bananas? Yes, it is. But the problem is in DC and Sac. If what we’re trying to accomplish is to improve things here locally, this seems like it won’t because the way sac does means testing is bananas.

  104. A pesky fact
    November 27, 2012 at 1:41 pm

    Link in above posts URL re: 60k/fam/year number

  105. Just Watchin
    November 27, 2012 at 1:50 pm

    Narration…..not sure if you read the Act, but it establishes a threshold: anyone who works more than 2 hours a week. In the effort to “punish” Walmart, lots of “small” businesses (McDonalds,which I’m guessing employs more than 25 people, for example) may move out.

  106. November 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Restaurant Owner :
    Most of you have never tried to run a business. Restaurants have more employees than most businesses by their nature. They have a very low profit margin.

    When a restaurant/hospitality worker complains about not making a living, they are often told things like “no one is forcing you to work in a restaurant” or “it is your choice where you work” or “you just need to improve your working skills to make your work product more valuable and businesses will pay you more” or sometimes even “no one owes you a living.” You see and hear comments like that all the time.

    Why doesn’t that apply to business? Aren’t you choosing to run a restaurant? If the margins are so low in food, why don’t you open a bank or a gold mine? It’s your choice you know. Or maybe if you just brush up on your entrepreneurial skills you can think of a better business to invest your capital in. How about “no one owes you a restaurant?”

    I am not trying to be harsh, but I am applying the same logic and the same free market analysis to you as a business owner that is often applied to the working poor. And I am doing it to make a point it is not directed to you individually.

    It also seems to me that you want to run your own business in an unregulated free market environment but you are forcing your employees to participate in a socialistic tip sharing pool and taking credit for it as part of thier compensation. I am not being harsh about this. I know this is done other places and your employees or most of them might even like it this way. I am just pointing out the irony.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  107. November 27, 2012 at 1:55 pm

    Interesting points, pesky. A leap into futureland suggests that some combination of life wage and actual employment would be best. Which in turn could point to the arrangement of many more jobs by lowering the hours per job (opposite of my point for the present, above).

    A small example in contrasts, out of personal experience. Norway in the 80’s had reached unbelievable richness, due to the oil discoveries. Youth in very far northern port cities lived a kind of floating life; clubs, hand-made clothes, etc.. But at every table in the evening, the women accounted the actual situation of the men, as women do.

    I was soon in another travel in Belgium, where on as little as two weeks a year employment (I believe, and at that time), a fellow could say ‘I have a job’.

    I think it would make a lot of sense to go to a guaranteed income. Americans could work their own balances with required degree of employment, etc. to suit various cultural urges. I think we could work with what they left.

  108. November 27, 2012 at 2:08 pm

    pesky,

    I’d have to spend time figuring out if what you are suggesting about the impact on benefits is accurate. I hate saying this, but I simply can’t believe it.

    If it’s true, it’s a significant problem. But I just have a “truthiness” gut feeling that the system, no matter how insane, is not so insane that a $7,000 raise can leave the recipient less well off.

    If you want to recruit people to your side of the political spectrum, clearly and undeniably demonstrating that the other side has produced the result you describe will win you a lot of converts.

    As for your “Weekly Standard” link about $60K in costs per family below the poverty line, I can believe that. From what I’ve seen, the main recipients of money from the welfare system are government managers in charge of preventing people in need from getting any allocated funds. That’s always struck me as a result of the meanness of our electorate, so concerned that an undeserving poor person might get an extra dime that it’s willing to hire and pay hordes of people to prevent the dime from being lost.

  109. A pesky fact
    November 27, 2012 at 2:56 pm

    Means testing is a beast my friend. The poverty trap is a well documented wicked phenomenon.

    I’m not trying to win anyone this say, I think the weekly standard article does enough for that on my behalf in regards to the overall problem.

    The quick look at means-testing charts I took showed 19k/y and 22k/y (obv. Changing with size of family) as being important thresholds. Above which all sorts of bennies get slashed. I’m not saying it’s 100% certain, but that it seems highly likely.

    You’re discovering why it’s called the poverty trap. If you lose section 8 and food stamps you’ve functionally just lost 10k+ a year in bennies. Food stamps functionally run 2k/y in value. CARE fluctuates, but can come out to another 500-1k a year depending on factors. Remember, these add up per person in the household.

    All you have to do to get it, Mitch, us reread that ZH post about disposable income. Above 29k (in PA I believe) your disposable drops, until back up to 69k (for the mom of kids, etc). Thus occurs because you’re paying out of pocket for things that used to be bennies.

    Like childcare, food, housing, child healthcare, etc. Which in Cali are also all means tested.

  110. November 27, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    The “welfare cliff” at 29K seems to be largely about the elimination of housing support, which sounds like “Section 8.” But the description of Section 8 policies here — http://home.howstuffworks.com/real-estate/section-8-housing2.htm — sound as though the phaseout of benefits is gradual if you are already qualified. So the largest “cliff” may, objectively, be inaccurate in its real world implication.

    I still think hard limits rather than phase-outs for benefits are a mistake. In my opinion, more earned income should always mean more available funds.

    What if I Start Making More Money?
    If you qualify for Section 8 and then your situation stabilizes, and your household’s income rises, that’s great. That’s how the program is supposed to help you. The income limits for qualification only matter at the time you apply for Section 8 assistance. However, as your family earns more, your vouchers will be proportionately reduced. Once you’re earning over 80 percent of local median income, your assistance will fade out entirely.

  111. November 27, 2012 at 3:55 pm

    Good find, Mitch, and certainly does make more sense.

    It doesn’t all make that amount of sense in low-income help, so it’s good a primary one leads the way.

  112. first world is the problem
    November 27, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    Blogs suck shit. Most of you are so nice when sucking shit, and so good at sucking shit that everything is going to suck shit just wonderfully in 10 years, and will increasingly suck shit with such fantastic greatness that you probably will forget just how blissful it is that everything is already sucking shit more and more every planetary orbit already. The sucky shitty problems of today are going to suck so much more shit that shit will really suck. You can bank on it, and believe me, a lot of people ARE banking on it!

  113. November 27, 2012 at 4:25 pm

    Dear first world is the problem,

    You need to spend some time with Henri; he has learned how to cope:

  114. Thorstein Veblen
    November 27, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    I’d sure hate to be my employers 25th employee. Seems like this would work better if applied more broadly, to all employees and countywide. Our geographic isolation would probably make a measure like this more effective.

  115. November 27, 2012 at 5:06 pm

    Thorstein, we do anticipate what we call compression right around that inflection point of 25.

    For instance, a company with 25 employees, but 10 of them part time, may choose to convert 2 part time jobs into one full time job. Naturally this will discomfort a few part time workers in this town (there aren’t that many businesses around 25 employees, there are clusters at 19 and 49 probably due to tax incentive constrictions) but that will be balanced by having more full time jobs in the community. The gross amount of employment will not change.

    As far as applying it more broadly, we agree that all workers should make a living wage but if you read the “Tiered Minimum Wage” post it explains why we are exempting Mom and Pop businesses. Politically the tiered minimum wage is much more popular and has far less opposition than a flat minimum wage. It is a historic compromise between regulation and deregulation. In this case, the large businesses are regulated, while the Mom and Pops are deregulated.

    We understand that the number 25 is an arbitrary number. So is the tradtional age of majority at 21 in our society. It is an arbitrary number. Some people are clearly ready for adulthood at 17. Some clearly aren’t ready for adulthood even at 25. But we use the arbitrary number of 21 for all. While we don’t want to take the analogy too far because we don’t believe in corporate personhood, we consider the number of 25 employees to be the number of majority for businesses. Under 25 employees, and you are a young growing business that needs flexibility. 25 employees or more and you are an adult business, with adult responsibilities in the economy, including paying a decent wage to your employees.

  116. November 27, 2012 at 5:21 pm

    Also Thorstein as I said to Charlie Bean, we would like to see this extended county wide. If you agree and want to do it we will help you get it going as a separate campaign. Let us know.

    info@fairwages.org

  117. November 27, 2012 at 5:25 pm

    eurekaworker@46
    “Exactly what has weakened the economy…?” – It was planned. James Traficant’s Congressional speech revealing the bankruptcy makes these principal elements undeniable. Ground shattering fact: they bankrupted the U.S., who defaulted on the debt, they called in all the gold (stole it) and sold us into financial bondage to cover their asses. A plot played out just as planned by those responsible – a gigantic debt based on fraud to restore Americans to their status as surfs. History confirms all of this, they spelled it out in books like ‘Tragedy and Hope.’ Understanding the bankruptcy and the restructure is necessary to understanding what the birth certificate is, who and what you are, and what we are dealing with.
    How can I be ‘A’ name? People I have known in my life have called me many names. I don’t think for one minute that the NAME is me. It is a tool to be used for nothing more than for one to participate in commerce. Nothing different than any board game token. If we play Monopoly, are you the sports car? Or does it re-present you during the game?

    I also agree with the notion that one is not the body, either politic or real. One is merely an animator for this avatar we put on to transact with one another. The problem is we have always been raised to believe this body has something that it didn’t have when it was born. Like maybe a name or even clothes. We entered the world naked. No baby has ever come in fully clothed and a dog tag attached. We have (posses as a user) a name given at law, and given names from parents and others we have come to know.

    My point, and I do have one, is learn the rules of the game and play it better than anyone else – you know this.

  118. Thorstein Veblen
    November 27, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    Went back & re-read 2 tier post. Pretty clever approach, a nod to pragmatism. Good luck!!

  119. first world is the problem
    November 27, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    I dunno mitch, I shudder to think how much time I’ve wasted over the years preambling any sort of common ground to action with the likes of these TROLLS aka worthless pieces of shit. Excuse me, nice people who have never given a fuck, don’t give a fuck and will never give a fuck. Business as usual is their business. Nobody’s mind has changed, nobody’s mind is changing, it’s all “right here” on the internet…over a decade of the same old bullshit being regurgitated and reswallowed and barfed up again for increasing consumption…except the dialog is getting more shortsighted and retarted all the time.

    YOU need to spend a good long time far away from a computer, because YOU are way out of touch! PEACE and I’m outa here…

  120. Plain Jane
    November 27, 2012 at 7:13 pm

    Using the “R” word as an insult, albeit misspelled, doesn’t make your rant more convincing.

  121. Anonymouse
    November 27, 2012 at 7:49 pm

    highboldtage :
    $12.00 is what we feel the minimum wage should be at to restore its real purchasing power circa 1968. Its been asked and answered in several ways right here on this thread but thanks for asking again. Maybe you should read the FAQ in the link for starters.
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    The minimum wage was a $1.65 per hour in 1968. Using the CPI index it should be something close to $10.30 per hour now.

    Maybe you should check your facts.

  122. Anonymouse
    November 27, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    If something so foolish as this proposal ever did pass you can bank on one thing. At least 25% of the local restaurants would go out of business within six months. Most of those owners are barely making it now and this would be the final straw.

    All their employees would be out of jobs. The chains like McDonalds & Burger King would lay off as many employees as they can by going to self service every way they can. They will raise their prices – period. Every business in Eureka that has 25-30 employees will fire enough employees to get under 25. Others will move out of Eureka to more business friendly towns like Fortuna.

    People like this highboldtage nut won’t care they don’t work now. It is not their lives that will suffer.

  123. Plain Jane
    November 27, 2012 at 8:16 pm

    As was demonstrated when Washington State raised their minimum wage considerably above their neighboring states, small businesses saw increased profits of an average of 11% and yet the Chamber and its sycophants continue to wail that jobs will be lost every time there is talk of raising the minimum wage. The concentration of wealth at the top is what has cost us jobs, not minimum wage increases.

  124. November 27, 2012 at 9:03 pm

    The 12 Companies Paying Americans the Least

    http://247wallst.com/2012/11/21/the-12-companies-paying-americans-the-least/

    The gap between rich and poor is well illustrated by the large multi-billion dollar corporations employing thousands of low-wage workers. With the Great Recession over, not only are many of these companies now hitting record profits, but their executive pay remains spectacularly high. Meanwhile, according to a report released by the National Employment Law Project, the current federal minimum wage the workers are often paid, is worth 30% less than it was in 1968 in terms of purchasing power.

    Based on the National Law Employment Project’s report, 24/7 Wall St. Identified the 12 largest companies in industries that are primarily low-wage employers. The report also provided the most recent available data on the total size of the companies’ workforces, the recent performance of the corporations in terms of revenue and profit, and the highest executive pay at these companies. 24/7 Wall St. also reviewed revenue, income, and the number of stores from company filings.

    These are the companies paying Americans the least.

    6. Burger King
    > U.S. workforce: 191,815
    > CEO compensation: $4,015,619
    > Revenue: $2.33 billion
    > Net income: $107.0 million
    > No. of U.S. stores: 7,453

    3. McDonald’s
    > U.S. workforce: 859,978
    > CEO compensation: $4,073,748
    > Revenue: $27.01 billion
    > Net income: $5.50 billion
    > No. of U.S. stores: 14,098

  125. November 27, 2012 at 9:07 pm

    Anonymouse :

    highboldtage :
    $12.00 is what we feel the minimum wage should be at to restore its real purchasing power circa 1968. Its been asked and answered in several ways right here on this thread but thanks for asking again. Maybe you should read the FAQ in the link for starters.
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    The minimum wage was a $1.65 per hour in 1968. Using the CPI index it should be something close to $10.30 per hour now.
    Maybe you should check your facts.

    Maybe you should read the whole thread. The minimum wage should be much higher than 10 dollars in order to regain its 1968 purchasing power. If it was indexed to gasoline it would be over $21 an hour. The cpi does not reflect the true rate of inflation over the last 4 decades.

  126. November 27, 2012 at 9:41 pm

    Anonymouse :
    If something so foolish as this proposal ever did pass you can bank on one thing. At least 25% of the local restaurants would go out of business within six months.

    No. You are fear mongering.

    Let’s think about it. Let’s imagine that every single chain restaurant in Eureka goes out of business tonight. All the fast food joints, Denny’s, Applebees, all of them. Tomorrow the gross demand for restaurant food in Eureka is going to be the same as it is today. The customers who went to the chains today will go to the remaining locally owned restaurants who will meet the demand. The locally owned bistros, if they have less than 25 employees, will enjoy flexibility in their employee compensation. They won’t have to pay $12.00 an hour, though of course many will pay more than the corporate chains do, Their business will double. They will hire the workers who were laid off by the chains to meet the demand. They will have to hire in order to handle their increased business.

    Small Mom and Pop restaurants will prosper under the two tier minimum wage.

    This is the real picture.

    In fact the demand might even be higher, because over 1,000 workers will be making $2,500,000 more per year and they might spend some of it in local eateries.

    The Eureka Fair Wage Act is designed to help small Mom and Pops and level the playing field for them. We would love to hear from local businesses with the acumen to grasp this truth.

    info@fairwages.org

  127. Cutten Resident
    November 27, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    Another great point Jane @#123!

    There’s simply no historic evidence that raising the minimum wage does anything but benefit working families, local economies and the nation, yet, this inconvenient fact has never stopped the critics, and Mitch. (Is it really that hard to concede that the Eureka Fair Wage Initiative has been remarkably successful, thus far?).

    Owning a home is the only capital most people will ever have in this capitalist system…staying on welfare will guarantee they never have it!

    No matter how many statistics Bill posts, the local boom of predatory businesses will be soundly against anything that improves the condition of their prey.

    Yes, 3-5 restaurants might still have 25 employees even after they restructure to avoid the ordinance, however, if they agree to Collective Bargaining with their employees they are exempt from the ordinance. Owner-operated businesses who work hard alongside their employees will have far less problems with Collective Bargaining than absentee owners. Too bad.

    Eureka has “looked like a ghost town” for the last 40 years regardless of the nation’s prosperity. It’s time workers took matters into their own hands for a change.

    As for Mitch’s question, (“…whether implementing it only in one small city is more likely to help the workers of that city or more likely to shift jobs from that city to its easily accessed neighbors.”….) He might want to ask cities and states what happened when they did the same, whether for the minimum wage, health care, civil rights, or the plethora of other social advances that business interest’s fought tooth-and-nail in small communities. Obama inched the nation closer to universal healthcare thanks to cities and states that already tested the water. (The sky didn’t fall as forecast).

    It’s time to err on the side of working families, the status-quo’s “unintended consequences” haven’t changed since the Pharisees.

    Narration makes the excellent point that most poverty-wage jobs are 20-30 hours a week…(Pesky needs to recalculate his “facts”!).

    And thank you Bill for reversing the old canard about employee’s having no right to a job….(“free to love-it-or-leave-it”). Business has no right to condemn tens of millions to grinding poverty. Business leader’s biggest fear is the historic inevitability of their unbridled greed: the reality that a little land reform favoring “Humboldt Collectives”, instead of corporations, could feed, cloth, house and employ every resident of H.Co, thus exposing the obsolescence of plutocrats….and the reason the U.S. has bombed every nation in this hemisphere that tried to implement it.

  128. Plain Jane
    November 28, 2012 at 3:04 am

    President Obama gets it. Yesterday he again proposed spending more than $25 billion to offer tax breaks to companies to hire workers or pay them higher salaries.

  129. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 7:43 am

    “The last time the country had a proposal similar to the hiring and wage subsidy was during the Carter administration, according to the Tax Policy Center”
    Yep……Jimmy had a real grasp on economic issues..

  130. Shudder Bug
    November 28, 2012 at 8:14 am

    Always nice to see the right wing baby killer check in with us libtards. How are things in the Redneck Riviera?

  131. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 8:18 am

    Great here Shudder Bug. Thanks for asking.

  132. SerfRider
    November 28, 2012 at 9:20 am

    The Great Recession is over? Enter the second Great Depression……..shit isn’t fixed by a long shot.

  133. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 9:26 am

    My good friend Shudder Bug got me to thinking, and I’ve changed my position on forced abortions for welfare women. Here it is: A woman collecting welfare and having her second (or more) child should have thier tubes tied during the birthing procedure. Once she has been “welfare free” for a period of two consecutive years, the procedure could be reversed, at the government’s expense, and she could have another child. However, if she is back on welfare at the birth of her third child, tubes are tied again, and she must be welfare free for three years. No infants are killed, and the baby factories may think twice before spreadin them without protection!!
    Thanks Shudder !!!!

  134. Plain Jane
    November 28, 2012 at 9:32 am

    I wish I could get that 4 minutes of my life back, SerfRider. How exactly does that video prove that the 2nd Great Depression is coming?

  135. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 9:34 am

    WOW……thought this would never happen, but I agree with PJ.

  136. Shudder Bug
    November 28, 2012 at 10:04 am

    “Here it is: A woman collecting welfare and having her second (or more) child should have thier tubes tied during the birthing procedure. Once she has been “welfare free” for a period of two consecutive years, the procedure could be reversed, at the government’s expense, and she could have another child.”

    You know I remember back in 2009 how all the tea baggers were crying in their beer about Obamacare and socialized medicine and how we had to prevent the “government” from getting between “us and our doctor.”

    You are unbelievably moronic.

    “the baby factories may think twice before spreadin them”

    Congratulations you just cost the Humboldt Republicans a half dozen more female voters.

    Keep posting, since I will love the day when the Republican party is small enough to drown in the bathtub, to paraphrase old Grover Norquist.

    Republican registration in Ca is under 30% now. They have achieved third party status in the country’s largest state – behind the Democrats and “Decline to State.”

  137. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 10:13 am

    Here’s a new flash Scudder…….I don’t live in Humboldt, so I could really care less. And like California is ever going to be run by anyone but democraps. LMFAO.

  138. CRAP
    November 28, 2012 at 10:27 am

    JW,

    We know you don’t care because we know you are crazy. But we aren’t and we want to get elected some day. Our local Republican Chairman, Joe Bonino is a stand up guy, a man of courage who “walks the talk” and he certainly does not agree with trashing the female gender or forced abortions. He is a good Catholic.

    We know Joe reads this blog and he comments here sometimes. He will be here soon to rebuke you we are sure of it. Within 24 hours he will make is statement. We understand that Joe has balls as big as Frank’s but of course we only know that secondhand. Balls so big he is a little slow getting off the mark if you know what I mean. But he will be here. Bet on it.

    TELL IT LIKE IT IS JOE!

    signed CRAP
    Conservative Republicans and Politicians
    Humboldt County Chapter

  139. November 28, 2012 at 10:44 am

    You really shouldn’t reply to Just Watching, at least as it looks here.

    He’s either simply baiting, or he’s trying to obscure what has become a very valuable conversation about the Eureka fair wage plan.

  140. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 10:59 am

    PJ……the only thing missing in your “CRAP” post is your tired “leg humping and wife beating” reference, and now you’re going to make up another name and claim it is Joe Bonino. I realize that you feel a need for a new identity, since few take your”PJ” comments serious anymore. But really…..a third identity?? Maybe a fourth name should be “Sybil”. You’re pathetic.
    And Narration…..I still don’t understand why Sacramento, with the super majority, doesn’t just pass a law to raise the minimum wage. It’s time to walk the walk……no excuses.

  141. Plain Jane
    November 28, 2012 at 11:01 am

    I agree, Narration. His only purpose is to disrupt our discussions with his flaming lies. If everyone just ignored him he’d go play elsewhere.

  142. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 11:05 am

    Creating new names to attack me is hardly ignoring. LMFAO !!!!!

  143. November 28, 2012 at 11:13 am

    The biggest issue, however, and the real reason why the minimum wage is not only necessary but must actually be raised, is the cycle of poverty in which the majority of minimum wage earners remain stuck. Consider these facts:

    •The annual income of someone earning the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour ($15,080) is 35 percent below the federal poverty level for a family of four ($23,050), and even at $10/hour falls short,

    •Two-thirds of all minimum wage workers have remained below this poverty line since 1959, when the federal poverty level was first established, and

    •While some states have a higher minimum wage than the federal level, 28 percent of all American workers still get paid at or below the level required to stay above the poverty line.

    Taken together, these statistics show that 20 percent of America’s workers do not make a living wage. This is a travesty that is not just unacceptable for an advanced society but one that will undermine our productivity, competitiveness, and economic growth for generations if it is not rectified. The real insidiousness of poverty lies not in the things that people cannot afford to buy but in the future that it destroys.

    Sanjay Sanghoee

    Minimum Wage, the Poverty Trap, and America’s Imperative

    article at

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sanjay-sanghoee/minimum-wage_b_2175801.html

  144. Sybil
    November 28, 2012 at 11:17 am

    PJ is a Democrat. I am not :PJ. But I will point out that many Democrats here while they find you disgusting are quite happy to watch you destroy the Republican party.

    Where’s the popcorn?

  145. HUUFC
    November 28, 2012 at 11:34 am

    I’m not worried much about the destruction of the Republican Party, as I am about the destruction of the United States of America by the hack in the White House and his enablers in the democrat party and the media.

  146. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 11:39 am

    Sybil :PJ is a Democrat. I am not :PJ. But I will point out that many Democrats here while they find you disgusting are quite happy to watch you destroy the Republican party.
    Where’s the popcorn?

    Nice one PJ. See…..this is what I come here for. You morons crack me up!

  147. November 28, 2012 at 12:12 pm

    Local union calls for $15 hourly wage while national campaign targets Walmart

    Nov 27,

    While boistrous protests targeted Chicago-area Walmarts Friday, a new local union formed in mid-November coordinated a second wave of actions calling for an increase in minimum wage to $15 per hour, well beyond a gradual statewide increase to $10.55 that may be approved next year.

    The activities were part of the Workers Organizing Committee of Chicago’s “Fight for 15” campaign. The Committee says it already includes employees at more than 100 businesses. After supporting the Walmart rallies, Committee members marched down Michigan Avenue and rallied both outside and inside Water Tower Place.

    http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=211613

  148. Just Watchin
    November 28, 2012 at 12:16 pm

    Hate to change the subject, but if you didn’t catch Jimmy Kimmle last night, go to youtube and watch it. He made it official…….Humboldt County is the laughing stock of the country!

  149. Plain Jane
    November 28, 2012 at 12:18 pm

    That is probably a more accurate number than $12 considering the absolutely necessary expenses which have skyrocketed in price that they don’t include in the “cost of living,” Eurekawork. That won’t make up for the years of minimum wage falling further behind the cost of living, but it’s a start. And if President Obama is able to get the tax credits passed for higher wages and/or new hires, small business will boom with the additional money circulating in our community creating more jobs and more profit for business owners.

  150. Anonymous
    November 28, 2012 at 2:27 pm

    Please don’t feed the trolls.
    Just Watchin is from outside the area and adds little relevance to these discussions.

  151. November 28, 2012 at 3:38 pm

    :
    “It’s time workers took matters into their own hands” – HOW TRUE. It’s time the sheeple stopped being fleeced – something ONLY the people can do – IFF they grow big ones.

    Into the maze of illegitimate government and pretend laws:

    PJ @128 – Pres. of U.S. INC (10 sq. miles on the East coast) Barry Soetoro a/k/a Obummer, got it right???? You do know that your discussing a puppet, right? $25 billion – nice number. So what? Print more funny money, I can see how that would help —Not even short-term at this point. THIS IS NOT A FINANCIAL CRISIS – it is about stark-raving mad, insane, criminals, peteophiles(sp?), mass murders – who are mindless, care less entities. Jeez Louise. http://www.youtube.com/embed/VUGsTRs_A7s

    Crap @138 – “We” want to get elected some day??? We – who? ‘Our’ local re publican??
    Do you even know what the word re public means? “joe is a good Catholic” — where’s the door? S T I L L clinging desperately to the in-the-crypt, out-dated, has next to zero meaning in the real world, words. I consider persons who are seemingly stuck in low-gear to be a fundamental threat to our survival.

    #149 – print more funny money. What’s the doll hair’s purchasing power? 4 cents, if that.

    Cutten@127 – “Owning a home…” We do not own anything. If you have a deed, look at it closely, above the line that says ‘Owner,’ you’ll see the word ‘Tenant.’ Slaves can not own anything. “No one is more hopelessly enslaved than the person who believes he is free.” Johann Goethe. WE CAN’T CORRECT IT IF WE ALL BELIEVE A LIE. Your vehicle that you think you own – look at the words-on-paper. 99.9% of the people register their vehicle(s) – ‘equity’ title ONLY. If it’s registered, the State owns it. Can’t they motion you roadside and hand you an ‘offer’ to contract, labeled citation? Can’t the State take it for whatever, whenever? And if it’s towed, yeah you can get it back for big bucks – and continue ‘use’ of it – equity title. Unless you/me/we convert gold/silver, value for value, into land, vehicles etc., we only believe we own these things.

    And the dish ran away with the spoon . . .

  152. November 29, 2012 at 6:48 am

    “No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country”

    FDR

  153. November 29, 2012 at 6:51 am

    “Nobody will ever deprive the American people of the right to vote except the American people themselves and the only way they could do this is by not voting. ”

    FDR

  154. November 29, 2012 at 6:53 am

    “It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something..”

    FDR

  155. November 29, 2012 at 6:54 am

    “But while they prate of economic laws, men and women are starving. We must lay hold of the fact that economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings.”

    FDR

  156. November 29, 2012 at 6:57 am

    “I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.”

    FDR

  157. November 29, 2012 at 7:01 am

    Franklin Roosevelt: Message to Congress on Establishing Minimum Wages and Maximum Hours

    May 24, 1937

    “Today, you and I are pledged to take further steps to reduce the lag in the purchasing power of industrial workers and to strengthen and stabilize the markets for the farmers’ products. The two go hand in hand. Each depends for its effectiveness upon the other. Both working simultaneously will open new outlets for productive capital. Our Nation so richly endowed with natural resources and with a capable and industrious population should be able to devise ways and means of insuring to all our able-bodied working men and women a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. A serf-supporting and self-respecting democracy can plead no justification for the existence of child labor, no economic reason for chiseling workers’ wages or stretching workers’ hours.

    Enlightened business is learning that competition ought not to cause bad social consequences which inevitably react upon the profits of business itself. All but the hopelessly reactionary will agree that to conserve our primary resources of man power, government must have some control over maximum hours, minimum wages, the evil of child labor and the exploitation of unorganized labor.”

  158. November 29, 2012 at 7:08 am

    “The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little.”

    FDR

  159. November 29, 2012 at 7:09 am

    “There are many ways of going forward, but only one way of standing still.”

    FDR

  160. November 29, 2012 at 7:10 am

    “One thing is sure. We have to do something. We have to do the best we know how at the moment. If it doesn’t turn out right, we can modify it as we go along.”

    FDR

  161. November 29, 2012 at 7:40 am

    “The only thing we have to fear is too few quotations.”

    FDR

  162. November 29, 2012 at 7:46 am

    There has been some debate over whether raising wages is a “core Democratic Value.” There has been some hand-wringing over whether raising wages is the politically expediant thing to do or not. There have been lies posted here about the “real purpose” of the minimum wage. Did you see anything about teen age workers or entry level workers in FDRs message?

    I think these quotes clear much of this up.

    Thank you very much.

  163. November 29, 2012 at 7:52 am

    A Message from FDR about the Living Wage

    After many requests on my part the Congress passed a Fair Labor Standards Act, what we call the Wages and Hours Bill. That Act –applying to products in interstate commerce — ends child labor, sets a floor below wages and a ceiling over hours of labor.

    Except perhaps for the Social Security Act, it is the most far-reaching, the most far-sighted program for the benefit of workers ever adopted here or in any other country. Without question it starts us toward a better standard of living and increases purchasing power to buy the products of farm and factory.

    Do not let any calamity-howling executive with an income of $1,000.00 a day, who has been turning his employees over to the Government relief rolls in order to preserve his company’s undistributed reserves, tell you — using his stockholders’ money to pay the postage for his personal opinions — tell you that a wage of $11.00 a week is going to have a disastrous effect on all American industry. Fortunately for business as a whole, and therefore for the Nation, that type of executive is a rarity with whom most business executives most heartily disagree.

    Franklin Roosevelt’s Fireside Chat, June 24, 1938
    http://www.mhrcc.org/fdr/chat13.html

  164. notafan
    November 29, 2012 at 8:04 am

    Is this the same FDR that’s policy’s extended the great depression by almost 10 years. Silly socialist. Never has worked, never will.

  165. Plain Jane
    November 29, 2012 at 8:49 am

    What extended the Great Depression was pulling back on stimulus too soon, not socialism. It was massive deficit spending by the government for the war which ended the depression and would have ended the depression much sooner had it been spent on building rather than destroying.

  166. November 29, 2012 at 8:57 am

    Well, at least it’s now clear where notafan stands. He’s still upset with FDR’s radical reforms. “If only Herbert Hoover had had four more years…”

  167. November 29, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Fight for $15 Spreads to New York – McJobs Should Pay, Too

    McJobs Should Pay, Too: It’s Time for Fast-Food Workers To Get Living Wages

    By Sarah Jaffe

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/11/mcjobs-should-pay-too-its-time-for-fast-food-workers-to-get-living-wages/265714/

    As low-wage service jobs become the new normal for millions of families, it’s time to rethink the balance of power between fast-food workers and their corporations

    The term “McJob” has come to epitomize all that’s wrong with the low-wage service industry jobs that are growing part of the U.S economy. “It beats flipping burgers,” the cliché goes, because no matter what your job might be, it’s assumed to be better than working in a fast-food restaurant.

    Today in New York City, though, hundreds of workers at dozens of fast-food chain stores are walking out on strike, demanding better of those jobs. At McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, KFC, Taco Bell, and Domino’s Pizza locations, workers have been organizing, and today they launch their campaign. They want a raise, to $15-an-hour from their current near-minimum wage pay, and recognition for their independent union, the Fast Food Workers Committee.

    Saavedra Jantuah, who works at a Burger King on 34th St. in Manhattan, explained that the $7.30 she makes per hour after two years on the job doesn’t pay her enough to support her son. “I’m doing it for him, I’m going on strike so I can bring my family together underneath one household,” she said. “A union can help us get to where we can make it in New York.”

    read the rest of the artlicle at link above….

  168. FecalSpliff
    November 29, 2012 at 9:04 am
  169. Anonymous
    November 29, 2012 at 9:12 am

    I recall Bush getting bashed for his “unfunded” war. But wasn’t WW2 an “unfunded” war declared by FDR? I’ve always had a problem calling any war “unfunded”…..they are ALL unfunded. It’s not like if there is a threat to the country, and then start saving money until you can afford to go to war.

  170. Plain Jane
    November 29, 2012 at 9:21 am

    It wasn’t just unfunded, it was unnecessary and based on lies. FDR didn’t start WWII or cut taxes during the war.

  171. November 29, 2012 at 9:22 am

    “…the local boom of predatory businesses will be soundly against anything that improves the condition of their prey.”

    I think you hit the nail on this one. The exploitation of the working-class has continued unabated for decades. New laws regarding bankruptcy, privacy and other areas where working people used to have protections; have been taken away. Credit card companies still get away with charging 38% interest. Check-Cashing/Pay-Day Loan businesses can charge up to 200-300% percent. This is all legal thanks to corruption in government.
    It’s so ridiculous to hear people call Obama a socialist, when he is the best thing to ever happen to the banking/capitalists. He has betrayed the progressives in so many ways, it’s hard to keep track. So the self-hating, working people who talk tirelessly on behalf of the wealthy lords can rest easy. Your masters are well protected.

  172. Plain Jane
    November 29, 2012 at 9:35 am

    When a local McFood franchise owner (one franchise) can afford a half a million dollar house and luxury cars for every member of his family (5) while his employees are receiving more support from the taxpayers than they receive in wages, there is something very very wrong going on.

  173. Just Watchin
    November 29, 2012 at 9:39 am

    Plain Jane :It wasn’t just unfunded, it was unnecessary and based on lies. FDR didn’t start WWII or cut taxes during the war.

    Ever look at the list of democrat senators that voted for the Iraq war……Reid,Schumer,Clinton, Feinstein, Biden, Daschle, And Hollings, just to name a few. They looked at the same Intel that Bush looked at, which turned out to be wrong. But would the real wrong have been to allow Sadam to continue killing his own people?

  174. janelle
    November 29, 2012 at 9:40 am

    “There is a price to pay for those low prices.”
    –from one of the videos floating around on the Black Friday Walmart protests.

  175. November 29, 2012 at 11:23 am

    Resident Troll @148,
    1) “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Gandhi
    2) The AEnlightened only want the truth, and deep from the tree’s roots.
    3) “Eureka” IS at the top of California’s state seal.

    For me it’s embarrassing when at a Supe’s meeting in the People’s Chamber, with “twist-tie” Sheriff Allman and the alleged Sheriff Downey, and I asked point-blank, “What are you two going to do when the military-trained FEDS. come into our counties? Will you STAND with we the people (Posse Comitatus)?” Downey’s reply, not surprisingly, was the usual poly tick one: blah, blah, blah, my position, blah, blah, blah – he will FOLLOW the instructions of the military-trained FEDS! What’s embarrassing is that after 18 months of Supe’s meetings, and letters to Downey, is his refusal to be an Oath-Keeper. Del Norte, Trinity, Siskiyou, Modoc, Tehama, Lassen, Shasta, and Plumas counties have Sheriffs who are Oath-Keepers, i.e. they have told the FEDS. that if they come into their counties that they come to them first – or else face being arrested. In one of my letters to Downey, I stated that if he will not STAND with the people of this county, THEN DON’T CALL HUMBOLDT YOUR COUNTY!

    Are we BRAVE enough to LOOK at the rabbit hole, let alone go DOWN it? It’s like the sword saying, “I don’t want to go through the fire of the blacksmith.” Well then, you’re not a sword. Change isn’t happening to us, we ARE the change.

    “When the people rise in masses in behalf of the Union and the liberties of their country, truly may it be said, the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.” Lincoln

    Sound the emotional notes. Don’t lose ideology.

  176. Cutten Resident
    November 29, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    November 29, 2012 at 7:46 am | #162 Quote
    “There has been some debate over whether raising wages is a ‘core Democratic Value’”.

    A recent phenomenon Bill!

    As William Jennings Bryant pointed out in the last Democratic Convention of the 19th Century: “It is a fundamental democratic value to legislate in the benefit of the poor in order to benefit every class that rests upon them”.

    Ronald Reagan’s long-discredited “trickle-Down” or “voodoo” economics, (as described by George Bush The Elder), is the republican ideology, a sensibility well-understood by Europe’s aristocracies, and a huge irony carefully avoided by media.

    When U.S. republican Christians finally realized what happens to those who side with the afflicted, they joined the ranks of the afflicters, regardless of their class.

  177. November 29, 2012 at 3:38 pm

    “Since the Earned Income Tax Credit lifts nearly 5 million Americans out of poverty each year, I’ll double the number of workers who receive it and triple the benefit for minimum wage workers. And I won’t wait another ten years to raise the minimum wage – I’ll guarantee that it keeps pace with inflation every single year so that it’s not just a minimum wage, but a living wage. Because that’s the change that working Americans need.”

    President Barack Obama
    Obama’s Speech in Janesville, Wisconsin
    February 13, 2008

  178. Just Watchin
    November 29, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    So……how’s that hope and change worked out for ya ???

  179. November 29, 2012 at 6:13 pm

    “The true friend of property, the true conservative, is he who insists that property shall be the servant and not the master of the commonwealth; who insists that the creature of man’s making shall be the servant and not the master of the man who made it. The citizens of the United States must effectively control the mighty commercial forces which they have called into being.

    There can be no effective control of corporations while their political activity remains. To put an end to it will be neither a short nor an easy task, but it can be done.

    We must have complete and effective publicity of corporate affairs, so that the people may know beyond peradventure whether the corporations obey the law and whether their management entitles them to the confidence of the public. It is necessary that laws should be passed to prohibit the use of corporate funds directly or indirectly for political purposes; it is still more necessary that such laws should be thoroughly enforced. Corporate expenditures for political purposes, and especially such expenditures by public-service corporations, have supplied one of the principal sources of corruption in our political affairs. ”

    “No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered-not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective-a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate. ”

    Theodore Roosevelt, Republican, 1910, “New Nationalism Speech”

    http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=501

  180. Plain Jane
    November 29, 2012 at 6:14 pm

    He was right then and it’s still right, Eurekawork. Unfortunately there are too many in Congress beholden to those who have different agendas who won’t do anything to reverse the dangerous accumulation of wealth at the top and consequent increase in poverty. We don’t elect dictators who can impose their demands on an unwilling Congress even if the majority of the people want it, and they do.

  181. November 29, 2012 at 9:32 pm

    Just so, highboldtage, and I hope people recognize this is Theodore, Teddy Roosevelt talking, who ran away from the Republican Party to help form the progressives. He was only distantly related to FDR, which is also interesting.

    I liked the FDR quotings this morning very much, as reminders. I’ve read a particularly interesting account of his period a couple of years ago when we were even more enmired, and want to find it to remember the head of projects he hired, which made the myriad of them that became the ongoing success against the face of entirely resistant capital. An interesting man, that one.

    I have an idea what Obama can do will have a look like those myriad projects, and in senses of our contemporary day that the whole can turn out just as fine. This is the quote which reminded me:

    “It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something..”

    FDR

    They did that, and it worked, across a whole spectrum of denial.

  182. November 29, 2012 at 9:33 pm

    p.s. that was very kind what you did with Henri, above, Mitch.

    I like the #2 the best, of those.

  183. Anonymous
    November 29, 2012 at 10:16 pm

    Another great quote Bill, thanks!

    Too bad most people can’t afford the cost or time that a computer requires, they’re definitely not going to see any reminders of the blueprint for prosperity FDR left Obama on CH. 3 evening news in Eureka!

  184. November 30, 2012 at 8:15 am

    Yeah, yeah “Eurekaworker,” I wouldn’t expect much from Obama in the way of standing up for Labor. He has already aligned himself with the “Owners” not the “Workers.” In fact the whole of the democratic party has abandoned labor at least as far back as Clinton and NAFTA.
    These politicians are all from the same communities as the CEOs and the billionaires. They are self-serving and they care not at all for people who cannot pay the extortion required to receive representation from them. The whole check and balance system of the constitution has been corrupted to such a degree that it no longer works for people loyal to the US. It serves those whose only loyalty is to money. Wealth knows no borders. We should start calling these people: “Billionaires-Without-Borders.” They’re “Global-Super-Citizens,” no laws, or morals apply to them.
    If the American aristocracy would just hurry up and move to Dubai, we could start repairing all the damage they’ve done to our country during their looting and pillaging of our wealth and resources.
    And they can take Obama and all those other phonies with them.

  185. November 30, 2012 at 8:25 am

    moviedad,

    I disagree with your assessment of President Obama. Like every politician since the dawn of time, his behavior is shaped by what he determines to be the universe of the possible. He has urged his supporters to keep pressure up after elections, and he is right — politics doesn’t end with an election, it just enters a new phase.

    The power doesn’t come from the President down, it comes from people up. Labor is strong when labor puts money and time into pressuring the politicians. It’s a shame the percentage of the American work force that is unionized keeps going down — get that number up and the politicians will be more inclined to dance to labor’s tune.

    In my opinion, the “they’re all the same, they’ve all sold out” meme is one that has been successfully peddled by the GOP to prevent people who could fight back from organizing an effective fight. It’s hard to work with an “ally” who will loudly tell anyone in earshot that you’re no different from the opponent you’ve devoted large parts of your life to fighting.

  186. Just Watchin
    November 30, 2012 at 8:29 am

    Plain Jane :He was right then and it’s still right, Eurekawork. Unfortunately there are too many in Congress beholden to those who have different agendas who won’t do anything to reverse the dangerous accumulation of wealth at the top and consequent increase in poverty. We don’t elect dictators who can impose their demands on an unwilling Congress even if the majority of the people want it, and they do.

    WOW…..I knew you were a left wingnut PJ, but I never thought you were in favor of turning our government into a dictatorship. Good thing that people don’t take you seriously any more.

  187. November 30, 2012 at 9:06 am

    I posted the Obama quote to show that raising wages is a core Democratic value, not to be critical of Obama. I myself voted for Jill Stein, but the Eureka Fair Wage Act campaign is non-partisan and is not part of the normal left right paradigm. We have Democrats and Republicans and independents on our committee. The Eureka Fair Wage Act is adhoctivism, where activists from across the spectrum come together to work on improving the community.

    The Democratic party is huge. It is what it is. I don’t expect a bloc of fifty millionor more voters to turn on a dime. FDR was not so progressive in his first term. It took a lot of pressure from within the party and without to move him in a progressive direction in his 2nd term.

    The Eureka Fair Wage act will probably qualify for the ballot without the Democratic Party’s help. We will need the Democrats and some Republicans too obviously to get it passed once it is on the ballot.

    Among Democratic voters nationally, raising the minimum wage ABOVE $10 an hour polls favorably 70-30. So there is a chunk of Democratic voters who won’t support it. That’s the way it is. Among Republicans voters nationally, raising the minimum wage ABOVE $10 an hour polls favorably 52%. So raising the minimum wage has broad bipartisan support among the voting population,

    It is the politicians of both parties that are dragging their feet. Politicians of both parties are heavily funded by business interests opposed to raising wages. Most of these politicians are Republican but some are Democrats.

    This is the realistic assessment.

  188. Plain Jane
    November 30, 2012 at 9:30 am

    You once again expose your functional illiteracy, JW. Since you are rich and retired, you should think about getting either a tutor to raise your literacy level or someone to read and explain everything to you.

  189. Jack Jones
    November 30, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Plain Jane is a FKN idiot retard. Go see the Office of Mental Health you looney.

  190. CRAP
    November 30, 2012 at 10:09 am

    Calling Joe Bonino!

    Where are you big guy?

    We Humboldt Republicans can’t afford to lose any more women like Virginia Bass! We know you’ve been busy counting votes but thats kind of over with now.

    C’mon JOE! Get on here and defend the women, like the fine Catholic gentleman that you are!

    None of the rest of us has the balls to stand up for women EVEN ON A FUCKING BLOG LET ALONE REAL LIFE (at least using our real names) but we know you do.

    WE ARE COUNTING ON YOU JOE BONINO!

    signed,
    CRAP
    Conservative Republicans And Politicians
    Humboldt County Chapter

  191. Cutten Resident
    November 30, 2012 at 2:25 pm

    Mitch
    November 30, 2012 at 8:25 am | #185 Quote

    “He (Obama) has urged his supporters to keep pressure up after elections, and he is right — politics doesn’t end with an election, it just enters a new phase.
    The power doesn’t come from the President down, it comes from people up. Labor is strong when labor puts money and time into pressuring the politicians. It’s a shame the percentage of the American work force that is unionized keeps going down — get that number up and the politicians will be more inclined to dance to labor’s tune.”

    The Democratic Bigs I’ve had the pleasure of speaking with all become uncomfortably silent when asked why a significant chunk of the party’s billions aren’t being focused on educating and registering voters. They often refer to them, (as Mitch has in a recent post), as “Those People”.

    Anyone who has canvassed their city understands that “Those People” are “Most People”.

    The public divestment movement has accelerated for a generation alongside the collapse of participating voters. A generation is a fairly recent phenomenon.

    If they had the resolve, this community’s democrats/progressives/activists, with political and monied connections could, with relatively little resources, identify unregistered households to contact with one-page fliers, (the Eureka Fair Wage Initiative, or the next progressive candidate, would make an excellent focus), to show how their vote on local issues and candidates could improve their community and families.

    Whether you trust citizen’s judgement, or not, their absence from the polls ensures the continuance of public divestment, mediocre right-wing leadership, and the absence of progressive change in an industrialized world rushing decades ahead of the U.S. in nearly every measurable category.

  192. Anonymous
    November 30, 2012 at 3:08 pm

    Australia passed legislation fining non-voters $50…next thing they knew…they passed universal healthcare.

  193. December 1, 2012 at 7:27 am

    Wal-Mart Means Fewer Jobs, Less Small Businesses, More Burden on Taxpayers

    NEW YORK – Public Advocate Bill de Blasio and the Hunter College Center for Community Planning and Development today released “Wal-Mart’s Economic Footprint” a comprehensive review of over fifty studies on Wal-Mart’s economic impact across the country.

    The joint review of key research papers from the past seven years indicates that the opening of a Wal-Mart in New York City would likely eliminate more jobs than it creates, result in the loss of independently owned small businesses, and create an increased burden on taxpayers.

    “The history of the last decade tells us that Wal-Mart stands to be our City’s Trojan Horse,” said Public Advocate Bill de Blasio. “Wal-Mart’s record of driving small businesses out of town and paying below-poverty line wages to its employees will only exacerbate the current decline of New York City’s middle class. We must do everything we can to spur job creation in New York City, but that does not include opening our doors to a proven job-killer.”

    “Studies from all across the country show that Wal-Mart’s arrival does not bring the increase in jobs and retail spending that the company promises,” said Brian Paul, Center Fellow and Masters of Urban Planning Candidate at Hunter College. “Instead, Wal-Mart captures spending from existing stores, driving them out of business and replacing existing retail jobs with lower-paying Wal-Mart jobs. This is not only about one store in East New York. Wal-Mart is planning a massive expansion into urban markets. Allowing one Wal-Mart to enter New York may open the floodgates and devastate small businesses in neighborhood retail districts throughout the city.”

    The findings from this review include the following:

    1. Wal-Mart’s Economic Impacts: Net Loss of Jobs, Fewer Small Businesses

    • Wal-Mart store openings kill three local jobs for every two they create by reducing retail employment by an average of 2.7 percent in every county they enter.

    • Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market does not increase overall retail activity or employment opportunities. Research from Chicago shows retail employment did not increase in Wal-Mart’s zip code, and fell significantly in those adjacent.

    • Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on
    existing retailers. Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the
    most adversely effected sectors, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40%
    after Wal-Mart moves in.

    • Stores near a new Wal-Mart are at increased risk of going out of
    business. After a single Wal-Mart opened in Chicago in September 2006,
    82 of the 306 small businesses in the surrounding neighborhood had
    gone out of business by March 2008.

    • The value of Wal-Mart to the economy will likely be less than the value of the jobs and businesses it replaces. A study looking at the estimating the future impact of Wal-Mart on the grocery industry in California found that, “the full economic impact of those lost wages and benefits throughout southern California could approach $2.8 billion per year.”

    • Chain stores, like Wal-Mart send most of their revenues out of the community, while local businesses keep more consumer dollars in local economy: for every $100 spent in locally owned businesses, $68 stayed in the local economy while chain stores only left $43 to re-circulate
    locally.

    2. Wal-Mart’s Costs to Taxpayers

    • Wal-Mart has thousands of associates who qualify for Medicaid and other publicly subsidized care, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill. For instance in Ohio Wal-Mart has more associates and associate dependents on Medicaid than any other employer, costing taxpayers $44.8 million in 2009.

    • According to estimates, Wal-Mart likely avoided paying $245 million in taxes 2008 by paying rent to itself and then deducting that rent from its taxable income.

    • Wal-Mart has admitted a failure to pay $2.95 billion in taxes for fiscal year 2009.

    3. Wal-Mart’s low paying jobs contribute to the decline of the Middle Class
    • Median household income declined by 1.8% nationally and 4.1% in New York City in 2009. This decline will be exacerbated by low paying Wal-Mart jobs.

    • Wal-Mart’s average annual pay of $20,774 is below the Federal Poverty Level for a family of four.

    • A Wal-Mart spokesperson publicly acknowledged in 2004 that, “More than two thirds of our people… are not trying to support a family. That’s who our jobs are designed for.”

    • Wal-Mart’s 2010 health care offerings have a high annual deductible of $4,400 which means a family would have to spend $5,102 of their own money on health care before Wal-Mart’s insurance pays anything. Based on the average salary of a Wal-Mart employee this payment represents almost 25% of their annual income.

    The full report is available at: http://advocate.nyc.gov/files/Walmart.pdf

  194. December 1, 2012 at 7:37 am

    In case the article is too lengthy, I highlight two paras here for the small business owners of Eureka, Arcata, Fortuna, Garberville et al.

    • Wal-Mart’s entry into a new market has a strongly negative effect on existing retailers. Supermarkets and discount variety stores are the most adversely effected sectors, suffering sales declines of 10 to 40% after Wal-Mart moves in.

    • Stores near a new Wal-Mart are at increased risk of going out of business. After a single Wal-Mart opened in Chicago in September 2006, 82 of the 306 small businesses in the surrounding neighborhood had gone out of business by March 2008.

    The full report is available at: http://advocate.nyc.gov/files/Walmart.pdf

    contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act campaign at 707-442-7465 or info@fairwages.org

  195. December 1, 2012 at 8:06 am

    Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, plans to begin denying health insurance to newly hired employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week, according to a copy of the company’s policy obtained by The Huffington Post.

    Under the policy, slated to take effect in January, Walmart also reserves the right to eliminate health care coverage for certain workers if their average workweek dips below 30 hours — something that happens with regularity and at the direction of company managers.

    Walmart declined to disclose how many of its roughly 1.4 million U.S. workers are vulnerable to losing medical insurance under its new policy. In an emailed statement, company spokesman David Tovar said Walmart had “made a business decision” not to respond to questions from The Huffington Post and accused the publication of unfair coverage.

    Labor and health care experts portrayed Walmart’s decision to exclude workers from its medical plans as an attempt to limit costs while taking advantage of the national health care reform known as Obamacare. Among the key features of Obamacare is an expansion of Medicaid, the taxpayer-financed health insurance program for poor people. Many of the Walmart workers who might be dropped from the company’s health care plans earn so little that they would qualify for the expanded Medicaid program, these experts said.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/01/walmart-health-care-policy-medicaid-obamacare_n_2220152.html

  196. Plain Jane
    December 1, 2012 at 10:04 am

    Robert Reich on Organizing Walmart and McDonalds

    “Organizing makes economic sense.

    Unlike industrial jobs, these can’t be outsourced abroad. Nor are they likely to be replaced by automated machinery and computers. The service these workers provide is personal and direct: Someone has to be on hand to help customers and dole out the burgers.

    And any wage gains they receive aren’t likely to be passed on to consumers in higher prices because big-box retailers and fast-food chains have to compete intensely for consumers. They have no choice but to keep their prices low.

    That means wage gains are likely to come out of profits – which, in turn, would affect the return to shareholders and the total compensation of top executives.

    That wouldn’t be such a bad thing. ”

    Read it all here:
    http://robertreich.org/post/36892075499

  197. December 1, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, plans to begin denying health insurance to newly hired employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week, according to a copy of the company’s policy obtained by The Huffington Post.

    Under the policy, slated to take effect in January, Walmart also reserves the right to eliminate health care coverage for certain workers if their average workweek dips below 30 hours — something that happens with regularity and at the direction of company managers.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/01/walmart-health-care-policy-medicaid-obamacare_n_2220152.html

  198. December 1, 2012 at 12:54 pm

    ANNOUNCING THE FAIR WAGE GRAPHIC CONTEST

    contact for media: James Decker 707.442.7465

    Submit a GRAPHIC for posters and lawn signs promoting the Eureka Fair Wage Act and you could win $100!! (and higher wages)
    Announcing the FAIR WAGE GRAPHIC CONTEST
    The Eureka Fair Wage Act, which will require large employers in Eureka to pay a $12 minimum wage, is expected to be on the ballot in March. The Eureka Fair Wage campaign is offering a $100 award to the person who submits a great graphic for use on fair wage posters and lawn signs.

    Submit your drawing or computer art by mailing it to:

    Fair Wages c/o Don Swall

    1140 E Street #30 Eureka, CA 95501

    or emailing it to info@fairwages.org.

    Please include your name and a way to get in contact with you.

    All contest submissions must be in by January 10th and the winning graphic will be announced at the Eureka Fair Wage benefit show, featuring local honky-tonk band, Rooster McClintock later in the month. Second and Third place prizes will also be announced at the benefit. You need not be present to win.

    More contest details can be found on the internet at fairwages.org or call 707.442.7465.

    Raise Wages!

  199. Just Watchin
    December 1, 2012 at 1:06 pm

    eurekaworker :Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, plans to begin denying health insurance to newly hired employees who work fewer than 30 hours a week, according to a copy of the company’s policy obtained by The Huffington Post.
    Under the policy, slated to take effect in January, Walmart also reserves the right to eliminate health care coverage for certain workers if their average workweek dips below 30 hours — something that happens with regularity and at the direction of company managers.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/01/walmart-health-care-policy-medicaid-obamacare_n_2220152.html

    It’s the beginning of the reaction to Obamacare, plain and simple.

  200. Anonymous
    December 1, 2012 at 9:25 pm

    No foreign corporation in their right mind would open their business in the only industrialized nation that refuses to invest in it’s human resources with universal health care.

  201. December 3, 2012 at 7:54 am

    NEW YORK (CNNMoney) —

    Just four years after the worst shock to the economy since the Great Depression, U.S. corporate profits are stronger than ever.

    In the third quarter, corporate earnings were $1.75 trillion, up 18.6% from a year ago, according to last week’s gross domestic product report. That took after-tax profits to their greatest percentage of GDP in history.

    But the record profits come at the same time that workers’ wages have fallen to their lowest-ever share of GDP.

    “That’s how it works,” said Robert Brusca, economist with FAO Research in New York, who said there is a natural tension between profits and the cost of labor. “If one gets bigger, the other gets smaller.”

    Profits accounted for 11.1% of the U.S. economy last quarter, compared with an average of 8% during the previous economic expansion. They fell as low as 4.6% of GDP during the recession.

    “Corporate profits took a big hit in the recession like everything else, but they’ve seen a massive bounce back,” said Heidi Shierholz, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal think tank. “Wages are determined by what’s going on in the labor market and we haven’t seen a big bounce back there.”

    A separate government reading shows that total wages have now fallen to a record low of 43.5% of GDP. Until 1975, wages almost always accounted for at least half of GDP, and had been as high as 49% as recently as early 2001.

    Read more: http://www.kcra.com/news/money/Corporate-profits-hit-record-as-wages-get-squeezed/-/11797182/17631336/-/4s9mdg/-/index.html#ixzz2E0LZypgW

  202. December 3, 2012 at 8:05 pm

    Do you want to raise wages for 1,000 of Eureka’s hardest working people?

    Do you want to counter Walmart’s unwelcome invasion of Eureka?

    You are invited to our meeting @ the Labor Temple on E St in Eureka.

    That’s the nice yellow building kitty korner from the wreck of the Downtowner @ 9th & E.

    We meet @ 615PM.

    We usually meet in the basement, occasionally upstairs. Please look around for us.

    We are planning our campaign to win the vote next year.

    We welcome community involvement.

    YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

    Your skill set is needed!

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact: James Decker (707) 442-7465

    info@fairwages.org

    http://fairwages.org

    $12.00 an hour, 95501, eureka, eureka fair wage, Eureka Fair Wage Act, eureka fair wage inititative, fair wage, fairwages.org, humble county, humboldt county, living wage, minimum wage, minimum wage initiative, raise wages

  203. December 4, 2012 at 7:51 am

    Workers Organizing Committee of Chicago issues new report: A Case for $15.

    The case for a $15.00 an hour minimum wage.

  204. December 4, 2012 at 10:57 pm

    Thanks Eurekaworker for putting it all in perspective. I turned 55 today, and I just can’t get over how bad things have gotten for the American Worker. Instead of all the working people standing together, there’s all these…..I don’t know what to call them. But they act as if their neighbor, and their co-worker is their enemy, and some distant billionaire is their best friend. They attack working people based on lies provided by the billionaire’s media empire. Unions drove jobs overseas? God, it just makes you want to scream!
    What’s that story…?
    There’s an Aristocrat and two workers sitting at the table with a big pile of cookies. The Aristocrat grabs all the cookies but one, then says to one of the workers: “That guy wants your cookie.”
    I’m so sick of the wealthy acting like they are entitled to everything. And they’re the ones always going on about entitlements! They attack working people for “welfare” when they are sucking us dry with their welfare. They call school teachers and anyone with a college degree an “Elite.” As if the wealthy in their gated communities, flying personal jets and owning mansions around the world…are just “plain-folk.”What the hell is the matter with people? More than 90% make less than 200grand a year. Why can’t they see who their friends really are?

  205. December 5, 2012 at 10:17 am

    FREE COMMUNITY EVENT, Saturday, Dec 15:

    FAIR WAGE CAFE

    On Saturday, December 15th, bring family and friends to the first FAIR WAGE CAFE, hosted by the Eureka Fair Wage folks.

    The Fair Wage Cafe will be at the Labor Temple in Eureka from noon to 5pm, a family friendly event with food, music, poetry, and children’s activities. We invite speakers to talk about fair wages and working conditions, and welcome local community groups to set up information tables. The Fair Wage Cafe is envisioned to be an open and casual space where people of all ages and stripes are free to encounter each other, express ideas for community building, relax, learn, and perhaps get involved in helping pass the Eureka Fair Wage act, raise in-home health care wages, and build strength in the working class of Humboldt County.

    FAIR WAGE CAFE a free community event Saturday, December 15th, noon to 5pm at the Labor Temple, 840 E Street in Eureka, where 9th and E intersect

    Call 707.442.7465 for more information or email info@fairwages.org

    See you there, at the FAIR WAGE CAFE, Saturday December 15th

  206. December 24, 2012 at 8:19 am

    Available for New Years parties,

    Friday Dec. 28 Saturday Dec. 29, Sunday Dec. 30 and Monday Dec. 31

    Bill Holmes, formerly of Two Smooth Stones.

    Solo acoustic/eclectic (amplified if needed) troubador/songwriter for your New Years party.

    I will do a professional level 3 hour show (3 45 min sets..) on one of these nights for your party or event. I have done lots of club dates, special shows, fund raisers and Farmers Markets right here in Eureka, Arcata and Humboldt for the last five years.

    folk, rock, roots rock, americana, country, some humor a little pop and a little blues.

    Any money I make playing music in December and January will go towards our effort to pass the Eureka Fair Wage Act, a $12 an hour minimum wage for large employers, so not only can you enjoy my music but your money will go to a great cause, and it will be recycled back to the community in a positive way.

    contact me humboldt.organizer@gmail.com put “music” in the subject.

    have a peaceful day, Bill

  207. December 28, 2012 at 7:39 am

    Do You Want To Sign the Eureka Fair Wage Act Petition or Register to Vote?

    Do you want to hold Walmart & other large corporate employers accountable to the community by mandating a $12 minimum wage for large employers in the City of Eureka?

    If you are a registered Eureka voter and want to sign the petition contact us:

    If you are not a registered voter but reside in Eureka we can register you also!

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact: James Decker (707) 442-7465

    info@fairwages.org

    http://fairwages.org

    $12.00 an hour, 95501, eureka, eureka fair wage, Eureka Fair Wage Act, eureka fair wage inititative, fair wage, fairwages.org, humble county, humboldt county, living wage, minimum wage, minimum wage initiative, raise wages

  208. December 29, 2012 at 7:09 am

    Things You Can Do To Help

    December 12, 2012 by eurekaworker in Articles | Permalink

    make yard signs,

    copy fliers,

    pass out handbills,

    hang fliers,

    collect signatures,

    table,

    write supportive letters to the editor,

    fund raise,

    bring groups on board with endorsements,

    set up places and times for people from your workplace to sign the petition

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact the Eureka Fair Wage Act Campaign

    Contact: James Decker (707) 442-7465

    info@fairwages.org

  209. Anonymous
  210. January 7, 2013 at 9:20 pm

    Benefit for the Eureka Fair Wage Act

    featuring wild & local honky-tonk band
    Rooster McClintock

    Saturday, January 19th at the Arcata Veteran’s Memorial Building (Vet’s Hall)

    Music begins at 7:00pm

    Brews from Mad River Brewing and Six Rivers Brewery

    The Vet’s Hall is at 1425 J Street in Arcata

    Tickets are $12 at the door.

    Must be 21 or older to attend

    If you live in Eureka or Manila, a shuttle bus will leave the show at
    11pm to return people home

    A night of music and brews to raise the minimum wage!

    The Fair Wage Graphics Contest winners will be announced during the
    January 19th benefit concert. Need not be present to win.

    Raise a glass. Raise the roof. Raise the minimum wage!

    Saturday, January 19th at the Arcata Vet’s Hall.

    The Eureka Fair Wage folks have proudly partnered with the Ink People
    to put on this event.

    for more information check out
    http://fairwages.org or call 707-442-7465

  211. ZER0
    January 16, 2013 at 2:24 pm

    Hey Eureka Fair Wage nutters!
    I’d like a list of businesses that would and wouldn’t be affected by your proposal, since your bearded, schizo-looking street worker couldn’t provide such. Frankly, I expect the latter part of said list to be quite short.
    Thanks a bunch.

  212. FUUHC
    January 16, 2013 at 2:53 pm

    Yeah, profits are more important than American worker prosperity. We don’t care bout our working neighbors, just the business owners and the stock holders.

  213. January 23, 2013 at 7:29 am

    Eureka Fair Wage Act canvassers registered 17 new Eureka voters in one day – yesterday!

    If you still haven’t signed please go to

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/do-you-want-to-sign-the-eureka-fair-wage-act-petition-or-register-to-vote-2/ we are still looking for a few hundred more signatures for a safe margin.

    Thanks to everyone who came out and had fun at our Rooster McClintock fundraiser and also of course to those who contributed.

  214. January 26, 2013 at 7:17 am

    9 Days Left to sign and put the Eureka Fair Wage Act on the ballot!

    contact info@fairwages.org 442-7465 if you want to sign.

    http://faiirwages.org

  215. ZER0
    February 4, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Hey, eurekaworker (or one of your many sock-puppet accounts within threads about this): I’m STILL waiting on hat list of businesses that would and would not be affected by your proposal. I’m starting (heh) to think you have absolutely NO IDEA what said list would look like…

  216. HUUFC
    February 4, 2013 at 4:00 pm

    If you can sit at a table outside the Co op all day the system must be working pretty well for you. If you found people that are not registered to vote they shouldn’t be voting anyways. What a waste of time.

  217. February 4, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    ZER0 :
    Hey, eurekaworker (or one of your many sock-puppet accounts within threads about this): I’m STILL waiting on hat list of businesses that would and would not be affected by your proposal. I’m starting (heh) to think you have absolutely NO IDEA what said list would look like…

    Just keep thinkin’ (heh)

    The information you seek is publicly available on the internets. Use the google. We did in June. We have a good idea what the list looks like, but of course the google is not perfect.

    We have faced an almost complete media blackout for 7 months but we have overcome it. We have done it with a constant presence in the community and some effective blogging and leafletting and a core group of activists supplemented by several dozen community volunteers.

    Thanks!

  218. ZER0
    February 6, 2013 at 2:00 pm

    Nice attempt at deflection, eurekaworker. “Use the google”…? Wow…
    Okay, let me ask you the following:
    1) Why should I have to do make my own list when you Fair Wage people allegedly composed this list eight months ago?
    2) Going on the assumption that said list WAS made, why was it never made public, since it’s such a significant thing to this proposition? Post it on the FairWage blog, so people can see it.
    3) Why do you people always instruct others to look up facts for themselves, when you (as the ones proposing this) have the burden of proof, and should be providing solid data to support your cause?
    4) Why is the data you DO provide supporting your claims based mostly on the opinions of college students and the like, from places far-flung from Humboldt? Don’t you think the results a local study be more relevant than something from down south, or from another state?
    5) Why can’t you (and by ‘you’ I mean everyone associated with your movement) give a straight answer to questions asked to them?

    Furthermore, I will ‘just keep thinkin”, and also just keep knowin’ a number of people who run businesses (the small kind) who would have to do exactly as I stated in order to stay open; that or give each employee fewer hours to compensate for the pay increase.

    I’m still waiting for that list.

    PS, “Media blackout”? Wut? Blogging & handing out fliers IS media, dood.

  219. February 6, 2013 at 2:26 pm

    Zero, if you employ more than 50 people,
    prepare for a union attempt. If less than 50 people-
    “Businesses (the small kind)”
    you are not union material.

  220. February 6, 2013 at 3:43 pm

    ZER0 :
    Nice attempt at deflection, eurekaworker. “Use the google”…? Wow…
    Okay, let me ask you the following:

    Furthermore, I will ‘just keep thinkin”, and also just keep knowin’ a number of people who run businesses (the small kind) who would have to do exactly as I stated in order to stay open; that or give each employee fewer hours to compensate for the pay increase.

    Small businesses are exempt from the ordinance, so why would they cut back on employees?

    Have you read the proposed ordinance?

    It would help your debate performance if you informed yourself you wouldn’t look so stupid.

    Here is the text.

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/text-of-the-eureka-fair-wage-act/

    “123. 04 MINIMUM WAGE.

    A. Employers for which twenty-five (25) or more Employees perform work for compensation during any particular calendar week shall pay Employees no less than the Minimum Wage set forth in this Chapter for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City during that week.”

    So the minimum wage ordinance will give an advantage of wage flexibility to local mom & pops, it will not burden them with extra costs.

    It is regulation for big business and deregulatiion for local sm,all business.

  221. February 6, 2013 at 3:48 pm

    JUst to give everyone here an idea of how moronic the “list” request is just go to Manta

    http://www.manta.com/mb_51_ALL_1ML/eureka_ca

    Gee that’s hard. I googled “eureka california businesses.”

  222. HUUFC
    February 6, 2013 at 4:04 pm

    Liberals are so nasty, I wonder why?

  223. ZER0
    February 7, 2013 at 1:20 pm

    Why so butt-hurt, EurekaWorker? Are you always this condescending and dismissive to people asking you questions you can’t provide answers for? It’s really big of you to resort to name-calling, BTW, it really shows just how professional and serious you are about this whole thing.

    Yes I have read the act, smart guy, which is why I asked a simple question (multiple times) that you couldn’t provide an answer to. You STILL haven’t, BTW, since the half-assed link you provided doesn’t list the number of people employed at ANY of those businesses, which is what I asked for.

    ‘Small business’ by your definition is not everyone else’s, Does Pierson’s count as a ‘small business’ or a ‘big’ one? I’d wager they have more than 25 people working there. What about Eureka Natural Foods? Do they count as a ‘big business’?

    It would help your debate performance if you could deliver the data requested of you, rather than posting a link that doesn’t provide the requested info — you wouldn’t look so stupid.

  224. February 7, 2013 at 1:50 pm

    If you look at the filters on the side panel at Manta . com there are filters for number of employees. I have the list I am not going to do your work for you. Make your own list if you can it is really pretty simple. Show some initiative. You conservatives always want someone else to work for you for free.

    Both Piersons and Eureka Natural Foods are large employers. They both have more than 25 employees according to our information.

  225. February 7, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    ZER0 :
    Hey Eureka Fair Wage nutters!
    I’d like a list of businesses that would and wouldn’t be affected by your proposal, since your bearded, schizo-looking street worker couldn’t provide such. Frankly, I expect the latter part of said list to be quite short.
    Thanks a bunch.

    I think you were name calling back on Jan. 16. Go find yourself.

  226. HUUFC
    February 7, 2013 at 2:22 pm

    “Go find yourself”, hmmmmm, I think I know what that means. I Suggest that you and your helpers stop wasting time on this useless project and get jobs instead.

  227. February 7, 2013 at 6:50 pm

    Activists in Eureka, California seek to put minimum wage rise to vote

    News Segments
    Tue, 02/05/2013 – 14:55

    free speech radio news
    http://fsrn.org/audio/activists-eureka-california-seek-put-minimum-wage-rise-vote/11536


    •Year: 2013
    •Length: 5:46 minutes (5.28 MB)
    •Format: MP3 Mono 44kHz 128Kbps (CBR)

    Job advocates are calling for a federal minimum wage increase, arguing that a stagnant rate hurts low income earners. According to the National Employment Law Project, the current wage of $7.25 an hour will lose nearly 20 percent of its real value in the next decade as inflation and the cost of living increases. But some local areas are poised to take action. In Eureka, California a proposed minimum wage ordinance would require large employers to pay workers at least $12 an hour. Activists have gathered about 2,500 signed petitions and they have until this Thursday to submit them to the city. They hope to qualify the measure for the June ballot. FSRN’s Eric Black reports the opening of a Eureka WalMart last summer helped spur the initiative.

  228. February 8, 2013 at 6:17 am

    Fair Wage Folks Turn in Signatures at Eureka City Hall for $12 Minimum Wage Ordinance

    Media Contact: James Decker (707) 761-5247 info@fairwages.org

    Eureka, CA: On Thursday afternoon, February 7th, the “Fair Wage folks” submitted about 2,700 petition signatures to qualify the Eureka Fair Wage Act (aka Minimum Wage Ordinance) for the city ballot. This people’s initiative, if passed by voters, would raise the minimum wage from $8 to $12 for large employers to pay their workers in the city limits.

    The Fair Wage folks thank the people of Eureka and throughout the county for their warm support and look forward to winning a fairer wage this year.

    The Eureka City Clerk and the Humboldt County Elections Office have up to 30 days to report as to the sufficiency of the petitions. Once certified, the Eureka City Council can choose to pass the Fair Wage Act as written or to set an election for a vote of the people.

    “I used to work at McDonald’s making minimum wage. You know what that means when someone pays you minimum wage? You know what your boss was trying to say? It’s like “Hey if I could pay you less, I would, but it’s against the law.”

    -Chris Rock

    Full Text of Fair Wage Act

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/text-of-the-eureka-fair-wage-act/

  229. Just Watchin
    February 8, 2013 at 11:44 am

    from the fair wage act:

    “123.05 WAIVER THROUGH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
    All or any portion of the applicable requirements of this Chapter may be waived in a bona fide
    collective bargaining agreement, provided that such waiver is explicitly set forth in such
    agreement in clear and unambiguous terms.”

    Does this mean that an agreement between a company and a union for, say, $10 / hour is not subject to the $12 / hour minimum?

  230. ZER0
    February 8, 2013 at 11:51 am

    @Eurekaworker: So if I don’t agree with you, that makes me a lazy conservative? I suppose that makes you a extremist loudmouth, then? Or you you prefer ‘radical’? Naw, it’s “Hero”, right?

    If I get snippy, whoopdee-doo; I’m a citizen. YOU’RE a representative of this proposition and a certain degree of professionalism is expected if you want to be taken seriously. Shall I go through this thread and find YOURself in it, talking down to people and insulting them for not thinking that this short-minded, isolationist proposal is the best thing since sliced bread? Now THAT would be a list. It is up to YOU to provide facts about the thing you’re trying to put forth as a law — the burden of proof lies with YOU, not the people asking you hard questions that you won’t admit you don’t have answers for.

    To humor you, let’s find “me” on the 16th of January:

    “Hey Eureka Fair Wage nutters!” — See below,

    “I’d like a list of businesses that would and wouldn’t be affected by your proposal, since your bearded, schizo-looking street worker couldn’t provide such.” — When I asked one of your signature gatherers, he gave me the crazy eyes and said ‘why does it matter?’. When I told him my opinion as to why it mattered (that businesses near the cutoff of employees would likely fire X employees or cut everyone’s hours to accomodate), he told me that ‘we weren’t living in Stalin’s Russia – at least not ALL of us. That’s not how HIS America works’. Upon asking him if he was implying whether he was calling me a communist, he said, and I quote, “Anyone who wouldn’t want to raise the minimum wage in Eureka probably is. That or they’re a WalMart lover.” Yeah, that pretty much summed it up for me. (In case you’re curious, it happened outside the CoOp on the day I posted my question the first time.)

    Moving along: “Frankly, I expect the latter part of said list to be quite short. Thanks a bunch.” Yeah, that’s fairly self-explanatory: there aren’t a great deal of businesses in Eureka that have less than 25 people that actually hire outside of family members or friends.

    FYI, Manta lists 5027 businesses in Eureka, so does that mean you looked through them all when you “did it in June”? If you did, then you must be aware that Manta lists the CoOp as a Heavy Construction company that employs 1-4 people ( http://www.manta.com/c/mm0fmz4/north-coast-co-op-inc ). Good, reliable data there, just like I expect from FairWagers…

    Anyway, if businesses like Pierson’s and Eureka Natural Foods are affected by this, then how does it ‘give breaks to local businesses’? Oh, wait, you said ‘small businesses’, didn’t you, and if local businesses like Pierson’s get the shaft, then it’s just collateral damage in your war against WalMart, right?

    You’re just pissed off that your months of vandalizing and loitering on the courthouse’s lawn did nothing — but how could it since the lot of you did just that: nothing? (Well, except for getting drunk/high in public, and accosting people who had real business there…) That and because all the people who pretended so loudly to be against WalMart all shop there now. Well, great, get pissed off and rage against ‘big businesses’, but leave LOCAL businesses out of it because you’re just going to hurt them.

  231. February 8, 2013 at 1:06 pm

    Large employers need to pay a decent wage to their workers whether or not they are local businesses. But the conventional wisdom is that local large businesses like Piersons and ENF already pay good above market wages right? So how would this effect them? At least if we believe the conventional wisdom?

    I am happy to debate civilly with any local real person as I have done all summer and fall and winter out on the street in person. If you are just an internet wanker from Bentonville, a paid net whore, a paid character assassin or an anonymous internet coward, you can go find yourself.

    So any of you want to debate here lets do it. Any of you local real people who are opposed to raising wages I promise to keep it as civil as possible. Lets do it. Use your real names and I will use my real name.

    Right here.

  232. Molly Ridge
    February 8, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    Whether or not he’s right about anything else, ZERO makes a point about keeping a professional attitude, Eureka Worker. If you can’t stay composed, then the people can’t take you seriously, which hurts the cause. I didn’t sign the Act so that its writers could bully people that don’t agree with them. That’s the point of democracy.

  233. Just Watchin
    February 8, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    Eurekaworker…..could you please answer the question in my post (#230) ??

  234. February 8, 2013 at 1:24 pm

    Just Watchin :
    from the fair wage act:
    “123.05 WAIVER THROUGH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
    All or any portion of the applicable requirements of this Chapter may be waived in a bona fide
    collective bargaining agreement, provided that such waiver is explicitly set forth in such
    agreement in clear and unambiguous terms.”
    Does this mean that an agreement between a company and a union for, say, $10 / hour is not subject to the $12 / hour minimum?

    Yes as long as it is a bona fide agreement. I believe that is a technical legal term having to do with federal labor law, but yes businesses with union contracts for less than 12 an hour will still be valid, the 12 dollar minimum wage will not apply to them.

  235. Just Watchin
    February 8, 2013 at 1:36 pm

    WOW. Sounds like a plot for boosting unionization if I ever saw one.

  236. ZER0
    February 8, 2013 at 2:02 pm

    @Just Watchin: Don’t count on it; he just insults you and changes the subject if he doesn’t know the answer.

    @EurekaWorker: “Paid character assassin”? While it’s flattering that you think I’m some kind of ninja, I’m afraid I’m simply a citizen of Old Town that lives across the street from Roy’s & works at the CoOp. And for the record, I get along just fine at $10.50/hour — which I EARNED, BTW — simply because I don’t live beyond my means. I also don’t have an inflated sense of entitlement, which a number of people around Eureka here seem to suffer from.
    I entered my job making minimum wage and did a good job, and as a result I’ve earned raises. That’s what minimum wage is supposed to be: a starting point, to build upon. If you can’t keep a job, or you do a bad job, then you don’t deserve to make more money. If people can’t live on minimum wage, maybe they shouldn’t have smart phones, cable, a car, or any number of extra comforts — that or they should stop being a part of the marijuana-obsessed local culture.
    If you want to ACTUALLY do something for Eureka, write a law that enforces companies giving annual reviews and raises for their employees, because many don’t give them the way they’re supposed to.
    Now then: You claim you’ve been ‘debating civilly’ with people ‘all summer and fall and winter out on the street in person’. So, is it just when you’re online, protected by your screen name that you turn into a belligerent douchebag if someone disagrees with you? And you call ME an ‘internet coward’…
    FYI, a girl hasn’t the necessary equipment to BE a “wanker”, you pig.

  237. February 8, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    @ Molly,

    Sorry you have it exactly backwards. I am a real person (Bill Holmes) who is blogging under this username (which I have stated on several threads here) in order to promote this Fair Wage Campaign. Whoever ZERO is is an anonymous coward who has been smearing us since their first post. I am not bullying, I am standing up to an anonymous cowardly bully.

  238. Just Watchin
    February 8, 2013 at 4:18 pm

    Funny how that little gem about union shops being exempt has never been mentioned.

  239. February 8, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    It has been mentioned several times in these threads right here on the Herald, so its not a deep dark secret.

    I agree that it incentivizes companies to unionize but our local unions (or any unions) have not offered any strong support to our campaign as of yet so there goes your conspiracy theory. George Soros hasn’t kicked anything down yet either.

  240. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 6:48 am

    One more question Eurekaworker: could the homecare workers, or any other union worker making less than $12 / hr., kick out the union and qualify for the $12 / hour wage?? Scenarios like that might explain why the unions haven’t thrown their weight behind your cause.

  241. February 9, 2013 at 7:32 am

    No. It is just a matter of education. The local unions have not really taken a good look at it yet, and once they do some of them will no doubt support it. In that sense, perhaps our campaign has failed to reach the unions with our message and maybe we should try harder to reach them. Several large unions are supporting the movements in New York and Chicago for a $15 minimum wage in those cities (I think SEIU and UFCW but that needs verified), and the recent minimum wage victories in Albuquerque, San Jose and Long Beach were heavily supported by organized labor and community and faith groups. In any case wages are just one component of compensation. Unions may (and do) negotiate over health care benefits, retirement benefits and working conditions among other things.

    Sure your hypothetical could occur but I remind you that the local IHSS workers do not have a contract as it stands (the county has refused to sign a contract with CUHW) so your question is moot. In the private sector I can’t imagine a union Safeway worker (for example) giving up unioin bennies for $12 an hour, but who knows, I could be wrong about that.

  242. February 9, 2013 at 8:11 am

    I posted the following right here (linky below) on Dec. 8, for you conspiracy theorists:

    December 8, 2012 at 4:53 pm | #23

    Quote

    “One of the features of the Eureka Fair Wage Act is the collective bargaining clause. If you are a business that falls under the mandate with 25 or more employees, if you unionize and sign a bona fide collective bargaining agreement with your employees, then you are exempt. So if you are really in a situation where paying 12 dollars an hour will threaten your existence, you can open up your books with your employees and work together to make your business stronger. The collective bargaining clause gives you flexibilty.

    This is called “Workplace Democracy” and it is a wonderful invention.”

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/fair-wage-cafe-next-saturday/#comment-186833

  243. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 9:08 am

    You profess that a living wage of $12 / hr. is absolutely necessary to pull people out of poverty, yet leave an “out clause” so long as a business allows it’s employees to unionize. While businesses do often negotiate benefits with unions, it is not always the case. They could just negotiate a wage scale, and that’s it. But this way, the unions have their foot in the door. I was actually in favor of your cause until this bit of fecal matter surfaced.

  244. February 9, 2013 at 9:11 am

    It surfaced on Dec. 8 or before, so how long have you been opposed?

  245. February 9, 2013 at 9:15 am

    Let’s just be clear about this. You, Just Watchin, self avowed Florida Tea Party Republican would support a $12 an hour minimum wage if there were no collective bargaining clause in it? Is that true?

  246. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 9:58 am

    eurekaworker :Let’s just be clear about this. You, Just Watchin, self avowed Florida Tea Party Republican would support a $12 an hour minimum wage if there were no collective bargaining clause in it? Is that true?

    Number one….. I’ve never said that I was a “Tea Party” Republican. I have said on here that I favor some democrat favorites like abortion (I even encourage it some cases, such as welfare mothers having their 6th child by their fifth “baby daddy”), limited forms of gun control, increasing taxes on the majority (77%) of working Americans, like Obama just did, just to name a few. And to be honest, I could really care less what Eureka businesses pay their employees. I just thought it would be fun to watch how the businesses react. I didn’t really realize what a blatant pro union organization ploy it was. I suppose I read past your Dec. 8th post.

  247. Anonymous
    February 9, 2013 at 10:24 am

    This is as illegal as a two cent coin. It discriminates against large employers who aren’t unionized. Small businesses, union shops and government entities are given special treatment.

    If the voters fall for this crap they once again will be stuck with huge legal fees as the city will be forced to defend it in court. The judge will toss it out and that is a fact.

  248. February 9, 2013 at 11:21 am

    Government entities are not exempt under the Eureka Fair Wage Act. Just to clear up that misconception.

    Oh, and two cent coins are legal just to clear up that misconception:

    “The two-cent piece was designed by James B. Longacre, the Chief Engraver of the United States Mint, and was the first coin of the United States to bear the motto “In God We Trust.”[2] The design is similar to the shield nickel of the same period, which was also designed by Longacre.

    The obverse (so designated because it bears the date) has a shield with a ribbon over it bearing the motto, IN GOD WE TRUST. Behind the shield are two arrows, and a branch with leaves (most likely an olive branch).

    The reverse has a wreath made up of several different plant components surrounding the words 2 CENTS. The words UNITED STATES OF AMERICA surround the wreath.

    The two-cent piece was made of 95 percent copper with tin and zinc making up the remainder. It was just slightly smaller than a modern U.S. quarter.[4]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-cent_piece_(United_States_coin)

  249. Anonymous
    February 9, 2013 at 12:27 pm

    So, all the IHHS workers would also get wage increases to $12 per hour? All the part time playground aides at all the schools? How about the hundreds of kids hired in government programs during the summer? Do you have any idea of how many of those people would lose their jobs?

    I understand that thinking isn’t your strongest subject but the only reason this won’t hurt people is because the courts will throw it out.

  250. HUUFC
    February 9, 2013 at 12:37 pm

    None of this nonsense will apply to state, or federal employees or indian business, nor will it apply to positions funded by those institutions. Another feel good waste of time. Sign this you will make someone else pay, and we will use the police power of government to make it happen. Just like Obama.

  251. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 1:44 pm

    Anonymous :This is as illegal as a two cent coin. It discriminates against large employers who aren’t unionized. Small businesses, union shops and government entities are given special treatment.
    If the voters fall for this crap they once again will be stuck with huge legal fees as the city will be forced to defend it in court. The judge will toss it out and that is a fact.

    I hadn’t thought about it, but you make a good point. A protracted court battle of “large” businesses, with Walmart at the lead, shouldn’t take long to send the city of Eureka into bankrupcy. This probably explains why unions haven’t jumped on board with the Act. They know it is a loser.

  252. Anonymous
    February 9, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    Before making dire predictions about the city being bankrupted, etc., perhaps you should have investigated whether a minimum wage increase with exceptions for large businesses and union shops has been implemented elsewhere, and whether there was any resulting litigation (and if so, what the result was). Just a thought.

  253. Anonymous
    February 9, 2013 at 3:16 pm

    Sorry, I meant “exceptions for small businesses and union shops…”

  254. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 3:55 pm

    Anonymous :
    Before making dire predictions about the city being bankrupted, etc., perhaps you should have investigated whether a minimum wage increase with exceptions for large businesses and union shops has been implemented elsewhere, and whether there was any resulting litigation (and if so, what the result was). Just a thought.

    Santa Fe, NM had the 25 employee benchmark in place, but in2007 had to amend it’s ordinance to include all businesses.

  255. Just Watchin
    February 9, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    Anonymous :
    Before making dire predictions about the city being bankrupted, etc., perhaps you should have investigated whether a minimum wage increase with exceptions for large businesses and union shops has been implemented elsewhere, and whether there was any resulting litigation (and if so, what the result was). Just a thought.

    The wording of the Eureka Act is very similar to the San Jose ordinance, except there is no exception for the number of employees. The same seems to be the case with the SF ordinance.

  256. February 9, 2013 at 5:41 pm

    craig :
    Are we serious? The employers will just pass on the cost of the higher wages. Minimum wage is not meant to be living wage. It is a starting point, you work hard you get a raise. etc

    This is right-wing BS. There have been study, after study after study. At NO TIME in the last 50 years has there been a price increase following a raise in the minimum wage. The right (they should call it the wrong) ALWAYS makes this claim, and it’s always wrong. When the Federal minimum wage was first instituted, it was a living wage. People could actually survive on it, without food stamps, without MediCal etc. This stayed true when Congress raised it with inflation. Then we went through a very long period when Congress didn’t touch it, but when they finally did, it didn’t even come close to be a living wage, as it once was.

    Besides, you are already paying the price for not raising the minimum wage. Your tax dollars, through the use of MediCal, food stamps, HUD, and other programs, make up some (well actually very little) of the difference. Of course, that’s why the rightys want to get rid of all those programs, all the time reading the words of their REAL GOD(DESS): AYN RAND!

  257. ICU812
    February 9, 2013 at 6:34 pm

    Not to butt in here, but what happened to Eric on this same issue, he has not posted anything on his blog since the 4th, hope he’s OK, if not I want my money back.

  258. February 9, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    FRANK JAGER: Job killer

    October 6, 2008 Heraldo Leave a comment Go to comments

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/frank-jager-job-killer/
    From the Clark/Atkins campaign:

    “GEORGE CLARK AND LINDA ATKINS REBUT JÄGER AND ENDERT ON RAISING THE MINIMUM WAGE

    Yesterday’s Eureka Reporter article: “Two Candidates Suggest Raising Minimum Wage,” discussed George Clark and Linda Atkins proposal to raise Eureka’s minimum wage from $8 to $9 per hour.

    Concerned about the fact that Eureka’s workers’ median income level is only 51% of the statewide average, Clark and Atkins feel that raising the minimum wage is a necessary first step, as part of a comprehensive effort to get Eureka’s economy back on track.

    The article also featured the reaction of Linda and George’s opponents in their race for Eureka City Council: Polly Endert and Frank Jäger respectively. “It’s totally the wrong approach,” according to Polly Endert and Frank Jäger added, “It’s a great idea, but it’s a job killer.” The evidence shows minimum wage initiatives are neither “totally wrong” nor “job killers.” They are, however, often resisted by entrenched moneyed interests whose influence in this campaign once again threatens the future of Eureka’s working families. When it comes to raising the minimum wage, Linda Atkins and George Clark feel the facts should speak for themselves.

    Over the past 12 years around 140 States and Municipalities have enacted living wage measures and 29 states and the District of Columbia all operate with minimum wages above the Federal standard. There is now a rich body of evidence in this area, none of which supports Jäger or Endert’s claims. In 1995 and in a subsequent study in 2000, David Card and Alan Krueger, “consistently found that changes in the minimum wage have not tended to raise unemployment by any discernible amount (and indeed have tended to be associated with slight increases in low-wage employment.”

    In 1998 a survey of professional economists at forty leading research universities in the field of labor and public economics published by Victor Fuchs of Stanford and Alan Krueger and James Poterba of MIT conclude that, “the general professional view is, again, that there were no strong negative employment effects, if any, from raising the minimum wage by relatively modest amounts.”

    Three more recent studies examining the impact of living wage laws in San Francisco and Los Angeles done in 2005 all agree: “None of these studies finds evidence of significant reductions associated with the implementation of living wages laws.”

    A particularly interesting study was done from 2001 to 2005 comparing employment growth between 11 states that operated with minimum wage levels higher than the Federal standard and 33 others that did not. The states operating with the higher minimum wage experienced overall job growth of 0.57 %, while those that maintained the lower Federal minimum wage had a 0.52% growth rate. In other words employment growth was actually slightly faster in those states which paid minimum wages greater than the Federal level.

    Given the enormous amount of evidence that contradicts Frank and Polly’s “sky is falling” reaction to the idea of raising the minimum wage for Eureka’s working families, are we to conclude that they simply don’t get it or is this what having “no agenda” means to them?

    George Clark and Linda Atkins believe in building our economy from the ground up. Raising wages in Eureka, which are so far below the state average, is the right and fair thing to do for Eureka’s working families. When the spending power of working families goes up, so does morale, which leads to productivity boosts, lowers job turnover, all in an ongoing “virtuous cycle,” and everyone benefits. Furthermore, increased spending by Eureka’s workers creates more demand for products, helping businesses while creating more jobs in the process.”

  259. HUUFC
    February 9, 2013 at 6:48 pm

    Study after study, well as a citizen of the United States I wish that eurekaworker had created a company, a company that had good paying jobs. In his company demand for highly skilled workers would require him to pay salaries above the minimum wage. Instead the path he has chosen uses the tyranny of the majority to force the government to create another enforcement agency backed up by police power to achieve equality or whatever.

  260. February 10, 2013 at 6:39 am

    HUUFC, tyranny of the majority or voice of the worker?
    From your posts I’d guess you’ve not worked a day in
    your life.

  261. Just Watchin
    February 10, 2013 at 8:07 am

    The terms “living wage” and “minimum wage” are co-mingled as if they are the same. Within the law, they are not. Living wage laws apply to companies with contracts with the city. A distinct difference.
    Also…. the “rich body” of evidence supporting minimum wage increases mentioned above relate to state increases. From what I’ve read, there are only five cities with a minimum wage higher than the state minimum.( that number may be off, but not by much).
    The link below details the minimum wage increase in Santa Fe, NM, as well as some other cities. Most interesting is how, due to legal challenges, the 25 employee limit had to be eliminated, and ALL companies had to begin paying the new wage. What they, the small businesses, thought was an advantage against the “big box” stores, a reason they had voted for the ordinance in the first place, evaporated.
    http://www.ilsr.org/rule/living-wage/2090-2/

  262. February 10, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Just to be clear, the Eureka Fair Wage Campaign does not say that $12 an hour is a “living wage.” We say that it is a fairer minimum wage than $8 an hour.

  263. Anonymoose
    February 10, 2013 at 8:45 pm

    Just to be clear, bill is not a lawyer and doesn’t know squat. He also supported measure T which was tossed out by the courts.

  264. February 11, 2013 at 3:34 pm

    Measure T was tossed by the courts only because the City of Arcata and the County could not afford to defend it in court. Thanks to Citizens United, a national “measure T” will soon be passed before Obama leaves office, ending Corporate Personhood and Corporate welfare, and bringing us out of the mouth of Fascism, and back to Democracy.

  265. Anonymous
    February 11, 2013 at 8:29 pm

    And if a national measure T is passed by the idiots in congress the Supreme Court will overturn it also. BTW the United States of america is not a democracy it is a republic.

  266. HUUFC
    February 11, 2013 at 8:30 pm

    That was HUUFC.

  267. Mouse Guard
    February 12, 2013 at 12:18 pm

    Anonymoose :
    Just to be clear, bill is not a lawyer and doesn’t know squat. He also supported measure T which was tossed out by the courts.

    So, what you’re saying is that this has been his agenda for years, since he was camping at the courthouse for weeks holding up signs saying the same thing?

  268. Mouse Guard
    February 12, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    I also wonder why this “EurekaWorker” (who some have stated is a misnomer, since he’s never worked here in Eureka) posted a 5-year old article, when there was a good one in the paper on the on the same day?
    I bet it’s cause Atkins takes a much more neutral stance, and that there’s as much negative as there is positive in it about raising minimum wage…
    ————————————————————————————————–
    From the Times Standard, 2/9/13:
    A group of local residents committed to bumping up Eureka’s minimum wage handed in about 2,700 signatures to the city Thursday to have their cause approved by the City Council or put on the next election ballot.

    The proposed Eureka Fair Wage Act, also known as the Minimum Wage Ordinance, would require employers within Eureka city limits to pay their employees at least $12 an hour. The initiative would exempt small businesses with 24 employees or fewer.

    The city clerk accepted the signatures, and will have 30 working days to verify the signatures before the measure will go before the City Council for approval.

    Eureka resident James Decker said he is one of the “Fair Wage Folks” working to circulate the petition since last summer, when the initiative was first filed with the city. Decker said it’s important that all citizens are able to make a fair wage, especially in a city like Eureka, he said, where poverty levels are higher than the state average.

    ”In much of the volunteer work that I do, I am working with the disabled or the working poor,” he said. “Often, they don’t have a home because they can’t afford the fair rent markets here. Because they are constantly broke, they often have bad credit. I am encountering these problems on an almost daily basis. It’s a very difficult struggle for the poor.”

    In 2008, California minimum wage rose to $8 an hour, but many say that is still far from a living wage. A 2010 report by the California Budget Project said to provide a “modest standard of living” for a family of four in Humboldt County without the help of public services, both parents would have to earn just under $17 an hour. A modest standard of living, as explained in the report, accounts for basic expenses such as the cost of food, child care and other essentials needs to support a family. The report notes that this does not include extras like college savings, vacations or emergencies.

    That same report said a single adult would need to earn $13.32 an hour to meet the same modest standard of living. The report assumes 40 hours worked per week and 52 weeks per year of work.

    Humboldt County Economic Development Coordinator Jacqueline Debets said the minimum wage in California was intended to be a living wage when it was established, but hasn’t kept pace with inflation and increased costs of living.

    While Debets said she thinks the idea of raising minimum wage is a valuable conversation to have, and is one city officials should talk about, she said there would likely need to be some sort of economic analysis conducted before such a measure could be implemented.

    ”There is considerable debate as to what the economic impact of these kinds of measures actually is,” she said.

    Humboldt State University economics professor Steve Hackett agreed.

    Hackett said the debate over the impacts of raising minimum wage is an unsettled area in economics literature.

    ”Progressives will argue that raising minimum wage will have minimal impacts on employment because the labor demand curve is steep,” he said. “On the other hand, more conservative folks will say the labor demand curve is flatter, meaning a minimum wage increase could have considerable negative impacts.”

    The only real way to resolve the question, Hackett said, is with data. It can also be helpful, Hackett said, to look at how raising minimum wage impacts other cities, like San Francisco, which has the highest minimum wage in the nation after voters approved an ordinance tying minimum wage to the regional inflation rate. Since 2003, when the ordinance was passed, San Francisco’s minimum wage has increased from $8.50 per hour up to $10.55 in 2013.

    According to a Dec. 31, 2012 article published in the San Francisco Examiner, a University of Kentucky study showed “minimum wage laws like San Francisco’s contribute to a lack of jobs for young workers.”

    The study detailed in the article concluded that “for each $1 increase in floor compensation, the unemployment rate among younger workers increases by 4.5 percent.”

    Eureka City Councilman Mike Newman said those are the types of findings that make him wary about increasing minimum wage in the city.

    ”Money doesn’t grow on trees,” Newman said. “Increasing minimum wage puts an unfair burden on our employers as well as raises prices for everything. While I appreciate that the economy is hard right now, this is something that has to be an across-the-board thing at either a state or local level. Otherwise it will just make it less desirable to do business in Eureka.”

    Eureka City Councilwoman Linda Atkins said she is split on the issue. Like Newman, she worries about being the only city with a minimum wage increase.

    ”It seems like not such a good idea,” she said. “But I do also know raising the minimum wage can be a good thing for people who are working and for the economy of the area. It’s tricky.”

    Atkins said she would prefer if the increase was countywide.

    ”Singling Eureka out, I’m just not sure about that,” she said. “But I guess the people will decide for themselves if they want to vote for it.”
    ——————————————————————————————————
    Fun Fact: the US Census says there’s 27,000 + people in Eureka, so 2,700 signatures is less than 10%.

  269. Anonymous
    February 12, 2013 at 12:52 pm

    Adjusted for inflation, $8 per hour in 2006 is the equivelent of only $9.36 per hour today not $12.

  270. Just Watchin
    February 12, 2013 at 3:36 pm

    It’s the 25 employee threshold that will be the issue, assuming that small businesses realize that, just like Santa Fe, ALL businesses will wind up being subject to the ordinance. It was previously stated that the act was modeled after the SF ordinance. Problem is the SF ordinance did notinclude the 25 employee threshold.

  271. Anonymous
    February 12, 2013 at 6:25 pm

    “The study by economist Aaron Yelowitz concludes that earlier studies failed to recognize groups who are losing out on work opportunities because of the higher labor cost — specifically teenagers. Yelowitz also incorporates The City’s mandatory sick leave and health care policies, which contribute to an actual “compensation floor” of nearly $13 per hour in San Francisco.

    The study concluded that for each $1 increase in floor compensation, the unemployment rate among younger workers increases by 4.5 percent.”

    In other words, they had to change the data used in order to reach this contrarian opinion. Who can name a business who hires more people than they need because minimum wage is low? Is there an abundance of jobs for teenagers at today’s minimum wage? Will McD’s lay off kids if they have to pay a higher wage? Who will flip the flippin burgers?

  272. Anonymous
    February 12, 2013 at 7:39 pm

    Is the decline in employment for younger workers due to an increase in employment for older workers in San Francisco because of the higher minimum wage?

  273. February 13, 2013 at 5:49 am

    Below is quoted from the link provided by Just Watchin. Just for factual clarity. Its a test of reading comprehension.

    “Santa Fe is the third city in the country to adopt a minimum wage law. (Living wage laws enacted in other cities apply only to city employees, city contractors, and companies receiving city grants and subsidies). In 2002, New Orleans adopted a minimum wage of $6.15 per hour, but the law was struck down by the state Supreme Court, which ruled that state law preempted the authority of cities to set wage levels. Santa Monica, California, also enacted a minimum wage of $12.25 per hour ($10.50 with health benefits) for businesses in its coastal tourism zone. The Santa Monica ordinance was subsequently withdrawn in a referendum vote that narrowly defeated it in November 2002.

    In June 2004, Santa Fe’s minimum wage law was upheld by a state court. It was challenged on the grounds that cities cannot interfere with the employee-employer relationship, but the judge ruled that regulating such civil relationships was a power granted to cities by state law. He also said that the ordinance did not represent an illegal “taking” of private property by government, and that applying it only to businesses with more than 25 employees was rational and did not violate the equal protection clause.

    An appeal of the judicial opinion was filed and a request to stay the living wage law until after the appeals process was also requested. On July 19, 2004, Judge Daniel Sanchez rejected the request of the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce and other business plaintiffs to stay the living wage until after their appeal – a process that could take more than a year. The Chamber argued that they would win on appeal and that some individual businesses would be forced out of business. The Judge rejected their arguments and left the law in effect.”

    http://www.ilsr.org/rule/living-wage/2090-2/

  274. Just Watchin
    February 13, 2013 at 6:57 am

    I meant to include a link that the 25 employee threshold in Santa Fe was eliminated in 2007.

  275. Anonymous
    February 13, 2013 at 7:03 am

    Santa Fe

    Estimated median household income in 2009: $52,045 (it was $40,392 in 2000)
    Santa Fe: $52,045
    New Mexico: $43,028
    Estimated per capita income in 2009: $29,669

    Looks like raising the minimum wage for all workers in Santa Fe had a positive result.

  276. February 13, 2013 at 7:38 am

    The following explains that the Santa Fe ordinance was amended by the city council to include businesses with less than 25 employees. It was not the work of the initiative campaign or mandated by the court system. IOW THE SMALL BIZ EXEMPTION WAS NOT SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGED IN COURT. It was the city council. You are fear mongering as I need only point out that our own city council could do the same thing right here right now, legally, if it chose to do so..

    Interesting is that the context of this letter quoted below is a request from the small business community of San Jose to INCLUDE such a small business (25 employee) exemption in the proposed San Jose ordinance (which passed in November by a large margin without the small business exemption.)

    Yes I actually do have a link, below:

    “C. Small Business Exemption

    In San Francisco, businesses with less than 10 employees and nonprofits were exempt from the minimum wage increase for the first two years. In Santa Fe, the 2003 law exempted
    establishlnents with fewer than 25 employees until the city council amended the ordinance in
    2008 to include these businesses. As referenced in the 9212 report, small businesses generally have less flexibility than larger companies to adjust to rising costs in order to remain
    competitive.

    One of the questions asked during the Council discussion on May 22 involved the definition and characteristics of San Jose’s small business community. The table below shows the distribution of small businesses in San Jose.

    The table provides information for the definition of small business used in San Francisco (fewer than 10 employees) and Santa Fe (less than 25). It also shows the definition of small business currently used by San Jose in order to provide a preference for small business in city government procurement of supplies, materials, equipment, and consulting services: 35 or fewer employees
    (San Jose Municipal Code Section 4.12.060).”

    http://www.piersystem.com/external/content/document/1914/1502431/1/07-24-12%20CMO.PDF

  277. February 13, 2013 at 8:06 am

    Just Watchin :
    It’s the 25 employee threshold that will be the issue, assuming that small businesses realize that, just like Santa Fe, ALL businesses will wind up being subject to the ordinance. It was previously stated that the act was modeled after the SF ordinance. Problem is the SF ordinance did notinclude the 25 employee threshold.

    The SF ordinance did have an exemption for small business, it was a phase in over several years.

    You see the elephant in the room? You should at least be able to smell it. The problem with basing your argument on the 25 employee threshold is that private companies have been receiving tax credits and purchasing preferences from cities for years, many based upon number of employees (i.e. small business credits/exceptions/preferences/exemptions.).

    In that non existent “list” that we don’t have and never made we found two distinct clusters of businesses employee size in Eureka, I think it was just under 50 and just under 20 (from my memory) and our assumption is that these are businesses taking advantage of small business tax exemption/purchasing preferences/enterprise zone tax credits or something similar.

    You can’t take with one hand and say no no no with the other.

  278. Anonymous
    February 13, 2013 at 8:16 am

    Another point to be made is that smaller businesses benefit from the higher wages paid by larger employees and can eventually afford to pay higher wages as well.

  279. Anonymous
    February 13, 2013 at 12:41 pm

    This act is giving some employers an advantage over other employers. The courts will strike it down as soon as it is challenged.

    It also makes no sense if we were to believe bill’s claims that it is to help the poor. Somewhere he said the number of employees affected were less than 200. What about the thousands employed by small businesses?

    This is just another attack against the big box stores and nothing more.

  280. Dan
    February 13, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    “This is just another attack against the big box stores and nothing more.” #280

    If it were that would be fine with me. The ordinance wouldn’t effect decent “big-box”
    stores in that decent institutional employers want to pay wages that will demand valued workers. They already pay more, and… Costco’s stock is up up up.

    “Costco’s generosity saw renewed publicity recently when Wal-Mart became mired in strikes over low pay and bad labor relations. Although Wal-Mart is admittedly a much bigger company, the Costco model proves you don’t have to squeeze employees.

    Wal-Mart’s way is not the only way to do business.”

  281. Politically Incorrect
    February 13, 2013 at 2:54 pm

    Save me Sacramento, save me! I am willing to trade my labor for less than a living wage and I need the politicians in Sacramento to save me!!

  282. Just Watchin
    February 13, 2013 at 2:58 pm

    eurekaworker :

    Just Watchin :It’s the 25 employee threshold that will be the issue, assuming that small businesses realize that, just like Santa Fe, ALL businesses will wind up being subject to the ordinance. It was previously stated that the act was modeled after the SF ordinance. Problem is the SF ordinance did notinclude the 25 employee threshold.

    The SF ordinance did have an exemption for small business, it was a phase in over several years.
    You see the elephant in the room? You should at least be able to smell it. The problem with basing your argument on the 25 employee threshold is that private companies have been receiving tax credits and purchasing preferences from cities for years, many based upon number of employees (i.e. small business credits/exceptions/preferences/exemptions.).
    In that non existent “list” that we don’t have and never made we found two distinct clusters of businesses employee size in Eureka, I think it was just under 50 and just under 20 (from my memory) and our assumption is that these are businesses taking advantage of small business tax exemption/purchasing preferences/enterprise zone tax credits or something similar.
    You can’t take with one hand and say no no no with the other.

    Personally, as a non local, I could give two shits about what Eureka businesses pay their employees. It’s just that local small businesses should know that they will pay the new wage at some point. Unfortunately, they will probably find out too late.

  283. BILL=SH!T
    February 13, 2013 at 8:06 pm

    eurekaworker :

    Just Watchin :
    It’s the 25 employee threshold that will be the issue, assuming that small businesses realize that, just like Santa Fe, ALL businesses will wind up being subject to the ordinance. It was previously stated that the act was modeled after the SF ordinance. Problem is the SF ordinance did notinclude the 25 employee threshold.

    The SF ordinance did have an exemption for small business, it was a phase in over several years.
    You see the elephant in the room? You should at least be able to smell it. The problem with basing your argument on the 25 employee threshold is that private companies have been receiving tax credits and purchasing preferences from cities for years, many based upon number of employees (i.e. small business credits/exceptions/preferences/exemptions.).
    In that non existent “list” that we don’t have and never made we found two distinct clusters of businesses employee size in Eureka, I think it was just under 50 and just under 20 (from my memory) and our assumption is that these are businesses taking advantage of small business tax exemption/purchasing preferences/enterprise zone tax credits or something similar.
    You can’t take with one hand and say no no no with the other.

    Don’t you love it when a self-serving net troll has nothing to say in response to your post because it knows it is wrong? So their response is to go in and take one sentence out of context and tries to show you up with that?
    Ah, the internet. Gotta love it.

  284. February 17, 2013 at 10:55 am

    2/15 Russia meteor hit in Chelyabinsk was caused by a secret Walmart space weapon made with whip-driven child labor in Tunisia because they refused to let them build a super-center there!

    Site where the Super Center would have been is now a hole in the ground!

    (Text on the news broadcast says ‘Walmart is blame for attacking meteor”)
    Their message is clear: LET US DESTROY YOU WITH OUR STORES OR WE’LL DESTROY YOU WITH METEORS!
    Asteroid DA13 was being guided towards Earth by a Walmart tractor beam, but the people of Lousiana submitted to having a Walmart express installed at a local elementary school after seeing the fiery mayhem in Russia that Walmart was capable of.
    This was prophecized in the Bible, people! If you rearrange the letters W-A-L-M-A-R-T you get “Lwraamtr”, which is the name of The Beast in the norse translation of Revelation!

  285. Just Watchin
    February 17, 2013 at 11:46 am

    Eurekaworker……When I read the “Fair Wage Act”, I must have missed the section where it’s explained to the small businesses that they will also be “phased in”(like you said the SF ordinance did), and they will also be paying $12 / hour. Please post where it can be found in the Act.

  286. Anonymous
  287. Anonymous
  288. Just Watchin
    February 17, 2013 at 1:52 pm

    Big surprise Anon…….Barry wants to spend more of other people’s money.

  289. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 7:44 am

    Krugman
    “First of all, the current level of the minimum wage is very low by any reasonable standard. For about four decades, increases in the minimum wage have consistently fallen behind inflation, so that in real terms the minimum wage is substantially lower than it was in the 1960s. Meanwhile, worker productivity has doubled. Isn’t it time for a raise?”

    Why doesn’t a modest increase in minimum wage increase unemployment?

    “workers aren’t bushels of wheat or even Manhattan apartments; they’re human beings, and the human relationships involved in hiring and firing are inevitably more complex than markets for mere commodities. And one byproduct of this human complexity seems to be that modest increases in wages for the least-paid don’t necessarily reduce the number of jobs.

    What this means, in turn, is that the main effect of a rise in minimum wages is a rise in the incomes of hard-working but low-paid Americans — which is, of course, what we’re trying to accomplish.

    Finally, it’s important to understand how the minimum wage interacts with other policies aimed at helping lower-paid workers, in particular the earned-income tax credit, which helps low-income families who help themselves. The tax credit — which has traditionally had bipartisan support, although that may be ending — is also good policy. But it has a well-known defect: Some of its benefits end up flowing not to workers but to employers, in the form of lower wages. And guess what? An increase in the minimum wage helps correct this defect. It turns out that the tax credit and the minimum wage aren’t competing policies, they’re complementary policies that work best in tandem.

    So Mr. Obama’s wage proposal is good economics. It’s also good politics: a wage increase is supported by an overwhelming majority of voters, including a strong majority of self-identified Republican women (but not men). Yet G.O.P. leaders in Congress are opposed to any rise. Why? They say that they’re concerned about the people who might lose their jobs, never mind the evidence that this won’t actually happen. But this isn’t credible.

    For today’s Republican leaders clearly feel disdain for low-wage workers. Bear in mind that such workers, even if they work full time, by and large don’t pay income taxes (although they pay plenty in payroll and sales taxes), while they may receive benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. And you know what this makes them, in the eyes of the G.O.P.: “takers,” members of the contemptible 47 percent who, as Mitt Romney said to nods of approval, won’t take responsibility for their own lives.”

    “The good news is that not many Americans share that disdain; just about everyone except Republican men believes that the lowest-paid workers deserve a raise. And they’re right. We should raise the minimum wage, now.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/opinion/krugman-raise-that-wage.html?hp

  290. February 18, 2013 at 8:15 am

    The Politics Of Raising The Minimum Wage – NPR RADIO PODCAST

    SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

    This is WEEKEND EDITION from NPR News. I’m Scott Simon. In his State of the Union address, President Obama called for Congress to raise the minimum wage to $9 an hour, up from its current rate of 7.25.

    PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Today, a full-time worker making the minimum wage earns $14,500 a year. Even with the tax relief we’ve put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That’s wrong.

    SIMON: But does raising the minimum wage help families if it discourages hiring? David Leonhardt is with his. He’s the Washington bureau chief of the New York Times. David, thanks for being back with us.

    DAVID LEONHARDT: Thanks for having me.

    SIMON: What do history and numbers say? Is raising the minimum wage a good way to help low-wage workers?

    LEONHARDT: Raising the minimum wage pretty clearly helps low-wage workers. I think sometimes you hear it described as some sort of free lunch and other times you hear it described as an economic calamity, and I don’t think it’s either of those.

    SIMON: Why not?

    LEONHARDT: Because what happens when companies have to pay higher wages, the evidence suggests, is that although it may have some modest effect on employment, it doesn’t have a big effect on employment. And so what that means is that the companies absorb the higher wages. And they absorb them either through taking a hit to their profit or they raise their prices, which means that essentially it comes out of all of their customers, which is to say the society as a whole. So, you can think of it as moving some income from the middle and the top toward the bottom.

    http://www.npr.org/2013/02/16/172175217/the-politics-of-raising-the-minimum-wage

  291. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 8:23 am

    When all employers have to pay an increased minimum wage, it’s a competitive wash. More money in consumer pockets increases demand which increases business profit, and by far more than the 1% they may have to increase their prices, although most could eat that 1% without the slightest dip in their lifestyles. Bosses with lifestyles of the rich and famous while whining that their minimum wage employees get food stamps and don’t pay taxes is sickening since it is the labor of their employees that supports their extravagant lifestyles.

  292. Just Watchin
    February 18, 2013 at 8:46 am

    Just Watchin :Eurekaworker……When I read the “Fair Wage Act”, I must have missed the section where it’s explained to the small businesses that they will also be “phased in”(like you said the SF ordinance did), and they will also be paying $12 / hour. Please post where it can be found in the Act.

    Eurekaworker…… please answer the question. Small business owners deserve to know before they vote.

  293. February 18, 2013 at 9:52 am

    Small businesses with 25 employees or less are EXEMPT under the Eureka Fair Wage Act. There is no phase in period. They are EXEMPT. Period. You missed it because it isn’t there.

  294. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 10:00 am

    The problem is the exponentially growing population. Curb population growth, tell the real estate investors and siminlar investors who manufacture value out of thin air that they can start squeezing water from rocks instead.

  295. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 10:08 am

    Until around 2003, when the price of regular gasoline doubled, just about every local business in Humboldt started employees at $8/hour when minimum wage was still $6.75. The gap was almost immediately displaced. Housing boom, population boom…a whole generation fresh out of college and in debt over their heads….the rich got richer, they squeezed money out of thin air.

    Lot of good target did us. Lot of good kmart did us before that. Lot of good costco did gas prices. Lot of all those new minimum wage employees did us, living in all those new complexes built, generating all that new garbage and traffic. And nothing’s changing.

  296. HUUFC
    February 18, 2013 at 10:22 am

    Yesterday at COSTCO gasoline $4.05 per gallon. You know what that means, our US Senators Feinstein and Boxer will write a letter to the Federal Department of Energy demanding to know why?

  297. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 12:00 pm

    Anonymous :
    Until around 2003, when the price of regular gasoline doubled, just about every local business in Humboldt started employees at $8/hour when minimum wage was still $6.75. The gap was almost immediately displaced. Housing boom, population boom…a whole generation fresh out of college and in debt over their heads….the rich got richer, they squeezed money out of thin air.
    Lot of good target did us. Lot of good kmart did us before that. Lot of good costco did gas prices. Lot of all those new minimum wage employees did us, living in all those new complexes built, generating all that new garbage and traffic. And nothing’s changing.

    Lot of good target, kmart, did us? Minimum wage jobs are better than no job. And what harm did Target & Kmart do us? Whatever jobs they might have displaced among the smaller employers and local employers were also minimum wage jobs.

  298. Just Watchin
    February 18, 2013 at 12:13 pm

    This is all about hating Walmart, plain and simple. If this gets passed, it will never make it into law. Walmart is legendary for fighting things like this. And in a contest to see who has the deepest pockets to fight in court, Walmart or the city of Eureka, my money is on Walmart.

  299. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 12:29 pm

    Predictions, please, #298 and #299, on the state of the environment and economy in this county in five years. Better? Worse? Why?

  300. HUUFC
    February 18, 2013 at 1:10 pm

    I’ll give my free opinion, after four more years of Obama the debt will be at $20 trillion. Business’s will be dropping health insurance by the thousands, forcing people to purchase their own health insurance. Many cannot afford the premiums thereby expanding Medicaid, and Medicare, increasing the deficit and debt. Liberals will call for a single payer system to solve the problem, forcing health care providers to slow down or give up because of red tape and deceasing reimbursements. And Obama will continue his class warfare using his one trick pony of taxing the rich until there is no money left to take.

  301. Just Watchin
    February 18, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    As for the environment, the natural Earth cycle of warming will be winding down, and all the talk will be about the coming Ice Age.

  302. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 1:28 pm

    Don’t forget the wailing and the gnashing of teeth, and cats and dogs living together in sin.

  303. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    Do you know why the degenerative effects of the internet will never be a popular topic?

    In the big picture, this blog is no different than a right wing conservative blog run by homosexual hating lunatics.

    ROFLCOPTERLOLCATMAO

  304. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 3:02 pm

    HUUFC :
    …after four more years of Obama the debt will be at $20 trillion. Business’s will be dropping health insurance by the thousands, forcing people to purchase their own health insurance. Many cannot afford the premiums thereby expanding Medicaid, and Medicare, increasing the deficit and debt. Liberals will call for a single payer system to solve the problem, forcing health care providers to slow down or give up because of red tape and deceasing reimbursements. And Obama will continue his class warfare using his one trick pony of taxing the rich until there is no money left to take..

    Well that’s a nice downward spiral prediction. Here’s another possibility:

    After four more years of economic recovery, revenues will have picked up significantly thanks to increased economic growth and to modest increases in the taxes of those who can easily afford them, and as a result the annual federal deficit will have been reduced or even erased, and the growth of the national debt slowed or stopped, all without the need for large increases in tax rates.

    An improving economy will mean that competition for good employees will require businesses to either continue to maintain employer-sponsored health insurance or pay employees more, in wages and salaries, with which they can purchase insurance through the private health insurance exchanges. Most states will have accepted the Medicaid expansion for low-income families, leading to better preventive care, which is far cheaper than dealing with these folks’ health care needs at the emergency room (after their health problems have worsened due to neglect). Liberals will continue to advocate for a public option alongside the private health insurance exchanges, which will push private health insurers to keep their premiums down by wasting less on overhead. More insured patients and less uncompensated care will allow health care providers to put more resources into improving patient care and less resources into collections. Fewer medical-cost-related bankruptcies will benefit the economy, and society as a whole.

    The idea that Obama is waging “class warfare” will be even more of a joke than it is now, with the wealthy and upper-middle-income still having more wealth than at any other time in modern history, but low-income, lower-middle-income, and middle-income families making at least some progress at reversing the decline they experienced during the previous decade. Congressional Republicans will switch from blaming Obama for the condition of the economy, to taking credit for it themselves — saying that things have improved thanks to their efforts, and despite Obama’s initiatives.

    So, I guess we’ll see four years from now, how close each of these scenarios is to the way things actually unfold.

  305. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    In five years I predict creeks and rivers in humboldt will be even lower, more will disappear altogether, watersheds will be further diminished as natural precipitation plummets, traffic will increase despite “improvements”, noise and air pollution will increase, roadside dumping will increase, urban garbage will increase, there will be more homeless, more desperate addicts, more truely local businesses will close while franchise industry continues to grow, cost of living will increase, cost of school will increase, cost of transportation will increase, cost of food will increase, forest fires will be a significantly greater threat…

    In five years there will be more of everything everybody’s complaining about right now, and that’s based on today vs. five years ago, and based on five years ago compared to five years before that….on down the line. And the local press won’t make waves, politicos won’t be put on the spot, same as before.

    Wage employees, the poor, all who put food on their table “just doing their job” and obeying the word of their employed superiors will continue to be held responsible by the media for lack of participation in the ongoing political scheme that finances using their own words against them. People who are vocal and active against the status quo will watch the power of their voice sink further than it already has in the cespool that is internet based information resources…the most powerful nullifier technology has imposed on the people.

    The wealthy industrialists of this county on up to federal buildings will be holding eachothers hands and patting eachothers backs while slowly continuing to kill us all, never once admitting to themselves the grievous mistake that is their business as usual.

  306. Just Watchin
    February 18, 2013 at 3:55 pm

    In five years, when the lawsuit is settled, Walmart will own Eureka

  307. HUUFC
    February 18, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    That reminds me of what an West German said when his country and East Germany were reunited; can we give it back?

  308. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 8:06 pm

    Within 5 years, environmental crisis will devastate the first world. Meanwhile in Humboldt, popular media continues to focus on marijuana growers’ effect on the environment, at all times downplaying, whitewashing and outright deffering the effects of logging and new construction…to say nothing of their cumulative effects globally. As if Humboldt isn’t part of the same mudball floating in space that we’re all stuck to.

  309. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 8:18 pm

    We need more freeways, less wetlands, less fields and forest and more cement foundations. We need to invite at least 10,000 more people into this county in the coming years, or doggonnit the federal government will be mad at our politicians, and our local developers and real estate investors might have to work at the new walmart they built for those new people instead. Of every 100 new living “units” constructed, how many gallons per day of pharmaceutically tainted blood, feces and urine is introduced into YOUR water supply? Such are the averages that the press will not choose to uncover. For every 10,000 square feet of new construction, urban or rural, how many tens of thousands of gallons of water is tapped at a time?

    etc etc etc.

  310. Anonymous
    February 18, 2013 at 8:21 pm

    311…bye bye.

  311. February 19, 2013 at 8:00 am

    Do more than the minimum on minimum wage

    Monday, February 18, 2013 | Posted by Jim Hightower

    podcast http://jimhightower.com/sites/jimhightower.civicactions.net/files/5-21_m_show.mp3

    story http://jimhightower.com/node/7962

    “In the wealthiest nation on Earth,” President Obama declared in his State of the Union speech, “no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty.”

    Right! Not only does his call to raise America’s minimum wage put some real pop in populism, but it could finally start putting some ethics back in our country’s much-celebrated, (but rarely-honored) “work ethic.” Kudos to Obama for putting good economics and good morals together – and for putting this long overdue increase on the front burner.

    But then came the number: $9 an hour. Excuse me, Mr. President, but that means a person who “works full-time” would nonetheless “have to live in poverty.” Yes, nine bucks is a buck-seventy-five better than the current pay, but it’s still a poverty wage, and it doesn’t even elevate the buying power of our wage floor back to where it was in 1968.

    ~VISIT LINKS ABOVE FOR THE REST OF IT~

  312. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 8:21 am

    If you didn’t want to live your life on minimum wage bill you should have stayed in school or developed some skills. I feel your pain, living a life as a burger flipper at McDonalds must have been tough for you.

  313. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 8:42 am

    #313 keeps drinking the “trickle down” believing its koolaid. No one should be working full time and still qualify for taxpayer subsidies unless their executives are making minimum wage and the shareholders aren’t receiving dividends.

  314. HUUFC
    February 19, 2013 at 10:15 am

    New phrase “taxpayer subsidies” used to be called welfare.

  315. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 10:51 am

    When they are provided to employees who work but aren’t paid a living wage, they are corporate welfare, i.e. taxpayer subsidies of corporate profit.

  316. Just Middle Finance
    February 19, 2013 at 11:39 am

    Self employed people don’t have a minimum wage. Newspaper carriers, beauticians, many self employed people work for what ever they can earn. Everyone makes their own decision about trading their labor. Why should the government interfere with the personal freedom of labor? Why do some people think the government is part of the problem yet they cry out to Sacramento or Washington DC for help with their own personal decision (working)? Instead of crying for help from the government, why don’t people refuse to work where the pay is low? Why don’t people boycott businesses with low pay? Because we are dependent on the government to solve all our problems. Help me Congressman Wiener, help me! Save me Senator!

  317. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 12:45 pm

    Self-employed people can set their own and work more hours. If they don’t make a living wage they too are eligible for taxpayer subsidies which in their case aren’t subsidizing corporate profits, just helping someone survive.

  318. February 19, 2013 at 12:50 pm

    “Intelligent men are cruel. Stupid men are monstrously cruel. ”

  319. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    “Why should the government interfere with the personal freedom of labor? Why do some people think the government is part of the problem yet they cry out to Sacramento or Washington DC for help with their own personal decision (working)?”

    Because money doesn’t grow on trees, dipshit. Even if it did, it’s not edible. Even if it was, you’re not going to donate your yard to people living in apartments to grow themselves some food.

  320. Just Middle Finance
    February 19, 2013 at 1:24 pm

    Other than name calling, why should the government interfere with my personal work freedom? Never-mind the money tree in the back yard and answer the question.

  321. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 1:37 pm

    Because people gotta eat, dipshit. And people need money to house themselves, dipshit. And the status quo, Business 101, is to siphon more money than exists from the largest percent of any population, dipshit. You are intentionally mislabeling survival as “freedom”, asshole. Perhaps you import wage slaves into this county? Build them some cages, collect the fruits of their labor at everybody else’s increasing expense.

  322. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 1:51 pm

    I think I’m gonna gonna go shoot myself now for responding to a troll. I was already going to slit my wrists for commenting on a blog.

    The government created the entire monetary system. They literally create everybody’s money…and in what human existence has become, they have intentionally created hundreds of millions of slaves to their whim. 400 million people cannot be sustained without cooperative involvement in their monetary system. Not that through sheer brute force would they allow a nation of nomads, either. Nobody is cheering for a plague of homeless starvation. Do the world a favor, JMF, and kill yourself.

  323. Just Middle Finance
    February 19, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    Wow! What a Hater! Why do some Liberals get so nasty when someone presents a different point of view?

  324. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:02 pm

    I don’t hate you, cocksucker. You’re “just doing your job”. Seriously, though, the world needs less people who do your job. You know exactly what your job is. For real, why don’t you just kill yourself? Sincere question.

  325. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:04 pm

    hmmm…censorship and the freedom to be stupid. GFYall’sS’s

  326. Just Middle Finance
    February 19, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    You can get help for your anger management. I wish you peace and prosperity.

  327. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:20 pm

    No you don’t. If you are in fact a real person, for whatever reason typing what you do, even if it is your job to simply entice response on this blog, your approach is nothing more than extolling negativity. You are a cancer on the anatomy of the planet, there’s no reason for me to be angry about that which I cannot control.

    I was completely sincere. Have you contemplated suicide? Will you just answer the question? GO FOR IT!

  328. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:23 pm

    Which of you shit fuckers is offended by language, and assholes like me who aren’t offended by such trite bullshit? What does it mean to evolve nowadays, pissdammit? It’s not like we’re being eaten by sabre toothed tigers or living in fear of cave bears. Who among you can’t get the fuck over some god damn words on a screen enough to read what the hell is being shit upon it?

  329. Just Watchin
    February 19, 2013 at 3:25 pm

    This is why I think the “anonymous” option should not be available. Some are intelligent, and some are complete morons. Sometimes, it’s hard to tell the difference.

  330. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:26 pm

    DER DER DER OBAMA DER DER DER ROMNEY DER DUH DER BE NICE ABOUT IT DER LOOK AT MY NEW PIECE OF SHIT DUH DER DUH READ THIS AND TALK YOURSELVES IN CIRCLES FOR ANOTHER FIVE YEARS.

    Mother Nature has been and is being disrespected. Mother Nature is being raped right now. Mother Nature will be raped tomorrow…right here in this county. Again, and again again and again.

  331. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:29 pm

    Bullshit, Just Trolling. Let’s see who shows their face in opposition to proposals like the one above. Let’s see who proudly puts their name on the line. You? Where is it? What’s YOUR name and occupation?

  332. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:37 pm

    When blogs advertise, why don’t they present a troll count?

    Here at FakePoliticsInternetBullshit, we have ____ resident trolls who will do their darnedest to get YOU to participate. Visit us, resist if you can! All of the “news” blogs that fly the “local” flag are hyped troll caves. Fake ass bullshit.

  333. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    What’s funny is knowing somebody’s staring at a computer screen monitoring everything that’s typed as it happens. “Just doing my job”.

    The health of the planet is bleak. You’re all sitting on your asses, twiddling your thumbs, intentionally spinning everybody’s wheels. If I am to believe it is my responsibility above and beyond my minimum wage paycheck to “do something about it”, consider this text part of that effort. History PROVES he who has the most money wins. People are being bought and sold…mind, body and spirit. The mere fact that it’s even become “a legitimate question” as to whether or not a point of no return has been crossed related to damaging the natural environment hasn’t even been enough for those with the most money…here and abroad…to change their ways, for fuck’s sake. They are the chosen ones of their religion, they will inherit the earth.

  334. Just Watchin
    February 19, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    Anonymous :
    Bullshit, Just Trolling. Let’s see who shows their face in opposition to proposals like the one above. Let’s see who proudly puts their name on the line. You? Where is it? What’s YOUR name and occupation?

    I’m not saying use your real name, dipshit. Just make up a name to seperate yourself from the other ” anonymous” posters.

  335. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    The people have been divided and conquered. The bad guys won. They get away with doing and saying whatever they want. Machismo civility makes desperate attempts to assure eachother there’s hope…but there goes more forest and here comes more freeway.

  336. Anonymous
    February 19, 2013 at 3:52 pm

    No, Just Trolling. You are a phoney liar. You are beyond help. You have lost sight of what is real. You are insane.

  337. Just Watchin
    February 19, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    Anonymous :
    No, Just Trolling. You are a phoney liar. You are beyond help. You have lost sight of what is real. You are insane.

    What exactly did I lie about?

  338. HUUFC
    February 19, 2013 at 5:00 pm

    Liberals are so nasty, why is that?

  339. Just Watchin
    February 19, 2013 at 5:26 pm

    He still hasn’t said what I lied about.

  340. February 20, 2013 at 6:51 am

    Rasmussen Poll: 54% Favor Raising Minimum Wage to $9 An Hour

    “Most voters don’t think the minimum wage is enough to live on and support President Obama’s proposal to raise it from $7.25 an hour to $9 an hour. They’re more narrowly divided, however, when asked if hiking the minimum wage will be good for the economy.

    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters favor raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour. Thirty-four percent (34%) are opposed, while 12% are not sure.

    The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 14-15, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.”

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/jobs_employment/february_2013/54_favor_raising_minimum_wage_to_9_an_hour

  341. Just Watchin
    February 20, 2013 at 7:24 am

    Just Watchin :

    Anonymous :No, Just Trolling. You are a phoney liar. You are beyond help. You have lost sight of what is real. You are insane.

    What exactly did I lie about?

    Anonymous….are you ever going to answer the question ??

  342. Just Watchin
    February 20, 2013 at 7:26 am

    eurekaworker :Rasmussen Poll: 54% Favor Raising Minimum Wage to $9 An Hour
    “Most voters don’t think the minimum wage is enough to live on and support President Obama’s proposal to raise it from $7.25 an hour to $9 an hour. They’re more narrowly divided, however, when asked if hiking the minimum wage will be good for the economy.
    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters favor raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour. Thirty-four percent (34%) are opposed, while 12% are not sure.
    The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 14-15, 2013 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.”
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/jobs_employment/february_2013/54_favor_raising_minimum_wage_to_9_an_hour

    I wonder what a Rasmussen poll result would be if voters were asked their opinion on a raise to $12 / hour.

  343. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 7:30 am

    That isn’t what is being proposed on a national level, Just Watching. We’ll find out what the people of Eureka think about it in the only “poll” that counts, their votes. In some states a person could survive in $9 an hour and some states, like California, they can’t.

  344. Just Middle Finance
    February 20, 2013 at 7:55 am

    The only “poll” that counts is that x% of free Americans are actually willing to work for less than their cost of living. The answer is simple, don’t work for less than a living wage. Period.

  345. Just Watchin
    February 20, 2013 at 8:16 am

    Anonymous :That isn’t what is being proposed on a national level, Just Watching. We’ll find out what the people of Eureka think about it in the only “poll” that counts, their votes. In some states a person could survive in $9 an hour and some states, like California, they can’t.

    The point was that, nationally, many people would probably think that there was an element of greed in asking for $12 / hour. If it is such a good idea, your super majority state legislature could do it tomorrow.

  346. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Anonymous :
    That isn’t what is being proposed on a national level, Just Watching. We’ll find out what the people of Eureka think about it in the only “poll” that counts, their votes. In some states a person could survive in $9 an hour and some states, like California, they can’t.

    Nobody is supposed to live the good life on minimum wage. Minimum wage is a training wage for the young. Otherwise it is for people with no job skills or talents doing low value jobs.

  347. February 20, 2013 at 8:35 am

    Anonymous :

    Nobody is supposed to live the good life on minimum wage. Minimum wage is a training wage for the young. Otherwise it is for people with no job skills or talents doing low value jobs.

    Franklin Roosevelt: Message to Congress on Establishing Minimum Wages and Maximum Hours

    May 24, 1937

    “Today, you and I are pledged to take further steps to reduce the lag in the purchasing power of industrial workers and to strengthen and stabilize the markets for the farmers’ products. The two go hand in hand. Each depends for its effectiveness upon the other. Both working simultaneously will open new outlets for productive capital. Our Nation so richly endowed with natural resources and with a capable and industrious population should be able to devise ways and means of insuring to all our able-bodied working men and women a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. A self-supporting and self-respecting democracy can plead no justification for the existence of child labor, no economic reason for chiseling workers’ wages or stretching workers’ hours. Enlightened business is learning that competition ought not to cause bad social consequences which inevitably react upon the profits of business itself. All but the hopelessly reactionary will agree that to conserve our primary resources of man power, government must have some control over maximum hours, minimum wages, the evil of child labor and the exploitation of unorganized labor.”

    A Message from FDR about the Living Wage

    After many requests on my part the Congress passed a Fair Labor Standards Act, what we call the Wages and Hours Bill. That Act –applying to products in interstate commerce — ends child labor, sets a floor below wages and a ceiling over hours of labor.

    Except perhaps for the Social Security Act, it is the most far-reaching, the most far-sighted program for the benefit of workers ever adopted here or in any other country. Without question it starts us toward a better standard of living and increases purchasing power to buy the products of farm and factory.

    Do not let any calamity-howling executive with an income of $1,000.00 a day, who has been turning his employees over to the Government relief rolls in order to preserve his company’s undistributed reserves, tell you — using his stockholders’ money to pay the postage for his personal opinions — tell you that a wage of $11.00 a week is going to have a disastrous effect on all American industry. Fortunately for business as a whole, and therefore for the Nation, that type of executive is a rarity with whom most business executives most heartily disagree.

    Franklin Roosevelt’s Fireside Chat, June 24, 1938

    http://www.mhrcc.org/fdr/chat13.html

  348. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 8:50 am

    Now survival with fewer taxpayer subsidies is the “good life?” People who make enough to barely make ends meet must be living the extravagant life then. With fools like you who vote, its no wonder this country is so screwed up and the working classes have seen a decline in wages and jobs as the wealthy hoard a larger share of wealth every year but complain about having to support the people whose labor made them rich.

  349. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 9:35 am

    Anonymous :
    Now survival with fewer taxpayer subsidies is the “good life?” People who make enough to barely make ends meet must be living the extravagant life then. With fools like you who vote, its no wonder this country is so screwed up and the working classes have seen a decline in wages and jobs as the wealthy hoard a larger share of wealth every year but complain about having to support the people whose labor made them rich.

    I understand your bitterness in failing in life. But it is not my fault that you didn’t stay in school longer or acquire any skills. I am not opposed to having a minimum wage but am opposed to those who think it should support them comfortably. If you raise it too high it will cause many of your friends to lose their jobs and that is a fact.

  350. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 10:28 am

    Your assumptions about my success in life only make an ass out of you. I am an evolved human being who cares about others who started out far behind me at birth and who haven’t had the breaks my parents’ affluence afforded me. I also have the intelligence to understand that if people can’t afford my product, I make nothing. If you think $12 will support people comfortably, you are delusional. I am a single person without children living a modest lifestyle on a modest income, over double the $12 an hour you find so extravagant and there is little left over for luxuries. Whining about hardworking people making $12 an hour while their bosses make 200 times that and more says more about you than you probably understand yourself. It isn’t pretty.

  351. Just Middle Finance
    February 20, 2013 at 11:25 am

    Why wait for the government? Why not seize your own freedom and choose to not work for less than a living wage? People have been waiting for Uncle Scam to give them a living wage for centuries. Why wait? Act today, act now! Don’t work for slave wages and don’t patronize businesses who exploit us.

  352. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 12:19 pm

    So, was yesterday’s ‘Anonymous’ a drunken rant by Bill, or what? (Posts 320, 322, 323, 325, 326, 328, 329, 331, 332, 333, 334, 336, 337, & possibly others.)
    He did seem to follow his pattern of insulting those who don’t agree with him and answering questions with inane questions when he can’t think of something to say, unless he simply doesn’t answer at all, mind.

    (Take note, Anonymous, THIS is how to troll something. Now go kill yourself, Dipshit.)

  353. February 20, 2013 at 4:35 pm

    The Delaware River, which winds south from New York on its way to the Chesapeake Bay, forms a natural boundary between New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Were it not for the divide formed by the river, the differences between those living on its east and west banks would be largely indistinguishable, even down to their accents. Except, perhaps, for loyalty to the Flyers or Devils.

    But in 1992, the boundary provided the basis for a seminal study on the effect of rising minimum wage rates on employment.

    In a paper published in 1993, Princeton economists David Card and Alan Krueger (now chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors) tracked the impact of a 19 percent increase in New Jersey’s minimum wage rate, comparing its effect on employment to employment across the river in Pennsylvania, where the minimum wage remained constant at the pre-increase rate of $4.25 an hour.

    It was a perfect natural experiment. The populations on either side of the Delaware were in almost all respects identical; the border between them was not a barrier to either commerce or employment. Workers from Pennsylvania were free to seek jobs in New Jersey. Business owners in New Jersey were not constrained from relocating to Pennsylvania. Customers, of course, were free to cross the bridge in search of the best deals.

    What the authors found was that “contrary to the central prediction of a text book model of the minimum wage, but consistent with a growing number of studies based on cross-sectional-time series comparisons of affected and unaffected markets and employers, we find no evidence that the rise in New Jersey’s minimum wage reduced employment at fast-food restaurants in the state.” In fact, they found that employment increased after the minimum wage rose. It’s a finding that has been born out again and again.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-diamond/boost-the-minimum-wage_b_2714235.html

  354. February 20, 2013 at 7:51 pm

    When Walmart Comes to Town, Local Businesses Close Down….

    Cherished Nevada City Restaurant To Close; Other Businesses To Follow Suit

    February 20, 2013 7:31 PM

    Reporting Neda Iranpour

    Nevada City, Trolley Junction

    NEVADA CITY (CBS13) – Despite a charming Foothills location and a Gold Rush history, many struggling Nevada City businesses are shutting their doors.

    After a quarter of a century, Trolley Junction is just one of four businesses to announce it is closing its doors at the end of the month.

    Robin Adams’ family created a quaint community from the ground up. In the late-70s building, the family opened the Trolley Junction restaurant, the Northern Queen Motel and a senior-living complex.

    “It just wasn’t worth it. After a while, it’s just too much, got to be too much,” Adams said.

    Longtime customers, and the more than 20 employees, are at a loss.

    “It’s a devastating loss to Nevada City and to me personally. Life as I once knew it is over,” customer Sally Farrell said.

    “It’s an icon in this town and it’s coming down,” employee Jesse Rowe said.

    The owner says the economy just took its toll.

    “Your food costs are escalating, the cost for gas to get food to these Foothills is escalating,” said Adams.

    She’s not alone. Business at Big O Tires in Grass Valley came to a halt Friday.

    Cirino’s had two locations in Nevada County. It’s Nevada City location is closing after 30 years, but will keep the Grass Valley location open.

    Villa Venezia, voted one of the area’s best Italian restaurants, is also saying goodbye.

    “Breaking our hearts, breaking our hearts,” customer Melise Munroe said.

    The community, bearing the brunt of four businesses closing down around the same time, fears there could be more to come in the Foothills.

    http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/cherished-nevada-city-restaurant-to-close-other-businesses-to-follow-suit/

  355. Anonymous
    February 20, 2013 at 8:04 pm

    #353 is obviously a troll since Bill doesn’t insult or rant. He politely states his opinions and backs them up with evidence.

  356. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 6:01 am

    eurekaworker :
    When Walmart Comes to Town, Local Businesses Close Down….
    Cherished Nevada City Restaurant To Close; Other Businesses To Follow Suit
    February 20, 2013 7:31 PM
    Reporting Neda Iranpour
    Nevada City, Trolley Junction
    NEVADA CITY (CBS13) – Despite a charming Foothills location and a Gold Rush history, many struggling Nevada City businesses are shutting their doors.
    After a quarter of a century, Trolley Junction is just one of four businesses to announce it is closing its doors at the end of the month.
    Robin Adams’ family created a quaint community from the ground up. In the late-70s building, the family opened the Trolley Junction restaurant, the Northern Queen Motel and a senior-living complex.
    “It just wasn’t worth it. After a while, it’s just too much, got to be too much,” Adams said.
    Longtime customers, and the more than 20 employees, are at a loss.
    “It’s a devastating loss to Nevada City and to me personally. Life as I once knew it is over,” customer Sally Farrell said.
    “It’s an icon in this town and it’s coming down,” employee Jesse Rowe said.
    The owner says the economy just took its toll.
    “Your food costs are escalating, the cost for gas to get food to these Foothills is escalating,” said Adams.
    She’s not alone. Business at Big O Tires in Grass Valley came to a halt Friday.
    Cirino’s had two locations in Nevada County. It’s Nevada City location is closing after 30 years, but will keep the Grass Valley location open.
    Villa Venezia, voted one of the area’s best Italian restaurants, is also saying goodbye.
    “Breaking our hearts, breaking our hearts,” customer Melise Munroe said.
    The community, bearing the brunt of four businesses closing down around the same time, fears there could be more to come in the Foothills.
    http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/cherished-nevada-city-restaurant-to-close-other-businesses-to-follow-suit/

    Not one mention of Walmart in the article. Now you’re making up anti-Walmart stories??

  357. Anonymous
    February 21, 2013 at 6:48 am

    With 15 Walmarts in the foothills near Nevada City, all those jobs and low low prices, you’d “think” local long term businesses would be thriving, not shutting down for lack of demand. So what does Watchin think is the cause?

  358. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 9:31 am

    Anonymous :With 15 Walmarts in the foothills near Nevada City, all those jobs and low low prices, you’d “think” local long term businesses would be thriving, not shutting down for lack of demand. So what does Watchin think is the cause?

    From what I could find, Nevada City, Calif., is a city of 3000 out in the middle of nowhere. It looks like one of those quaint, trendy towns that people like to vist for a day trip. But with everone’s taxes having gone up by 2 % recently, fewer people have extra money for such things, especially with Calif. gas prices.I could find no indication that there was a Walmart in the city. And Anonymous, the owner of the Trolley Juction restaurant told you the reason……” the economy just took it’s toll”.

  359. Anonymous
    February 21, 2013 at 9:36 am

    And you think Walmart doesn’t play a huge roll in the bad economy? Where do they make all their products again and what do they pay their employees?

  360. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 9:45 am

    Anonymous :And you think Walmart doesn’t play a huge roll in the bad economy? Where do they make all their products again and what do they pay their employees?

    The post by Eurekaworker was titled: “When Walmart Comes to Town, Local Businesses Close Down….”. What part of that isn’t clear, dipstick?

  361. Anonymous
    February 21, 2013 at 10:12 am

    What part of 15 Walmarts in the foothills near Nevada City isn’t clear, dipstick? The article was about businesses closing. Bill has the intellectual capacity to link that to Walmarts dominating the market, driving down wages from manufacturing to retail. When wages drop people can’t afford to eat in nice restaurants or buy tires from a local business when Chinese tires at Walmart are so cheap, so businesses close and more people are unemployed and more businesses close. Thank God for Walmart or people wouldn’t have any jobs or places they can afford to shop.

  362. February 21, 2013 at 10:19 am

    Yes, the map of hills and vales north and east of Sacramento is a moonscape of walmarts. This is a wake up call to small businesses in small towns within 30 miles of a walmart. Their former customers are driving to town to shop at walmart and they are spendng the rest of their meager bankrolls there. No money left to spend with small town mechants. Wake up Fortuna! Wake up Garberville! Your way of life is about to change.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  363. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 10:31 am

    Anonymous :What part of 15 Walmarts in the foothills near Nevada City isn’t clear, dipstick? The article was about businesses closing. Bill has the intellectual capacity to link that to Walmarts dominating the market, driving down wages from manufacturing to retail. When wages drop people can’t afford to eat in nice restaurants or buy tires from a local business when Chinese tires at Walmart are so cheap, so businesses close and more people are unemployed and more businesses close. Thank God for Walmart or people wouldn’t have any jobs or places they can afford to shop.

    In the linked article, several business owners and residents are interviewed, and not a one blames Walmart. That’s unusual, since people rarely miss an opportunity to blame Walmart for everything. You need to come up with a better reason than that.

  364. February 21, 2013 at 10:52 am

    You just don’t get it, JW. Sadly most of these small business people don’t either, they have never faced this kind of ruthless competition before, the kind that literally hollows out the local economies like a parasite feasting on its host. They are like survivors of a hurricane, dazed, lost everything but grateful to be alive. It would never enter the minds of many of them that Walmart could have caused this. Many of them are traditional Republicans with a traditional pro-business (in general ) outook.

    I am making that connection for you. I am making that connection for them too. Now they can think about who to blame for this situation and we can learn how to avoid it. Walmart has achieved saturation in the Sacramento region. This is what market saturation looks like in a region of 1,000 square miles.

    The only businesses that will benefit from walmart are other large corporate chain restaurants and stores. The rest of you will be redundant. Obsolete. Surplus.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  365. Anonymous
    February 21, 2013 at 11:13 am

    “Many of them are traditional Republicans with a traditional pro-business”

    Nevada County is very conservative for California.

  366. Anonymous
    February 21, 2013 at 12:09 pm

    Yeah right bill, Walmart has really devasted Eureka.

    If your looney proposition passes it will have more of a negative effect on Eureka than anything else.

  367. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 12:25 pm

    WOOOHOOOO….looks like I’m getting censored !!

  368. Just Watchin
    February 21, 2013 at 12:32 pm

    I asked how many small businesses have closed in the 8 months since Walmart opened, and it gets deleted.

  369. February 22, 2013 at 7:59 am

    Minimum Wage/Maximum Growth

    Posted: 02/21/2013 3:20 pm

    Robert D. Atkinson, Ph.D.

    In his State of the Union Address president Obama proposed that Congress increase the minimum wage to $9.00 per hour.

    Almost immediately a chorus of opposition based on neoclassical economics emerged, arguing that such a change would kill job creation. As former Bush Administration economist Greg Mankiw notes, “there is 79 percent agreement among his peers that a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers.” But let’s be clear, what Mankiw really means to say is a 79 percent agreement among neoclassical economists.

    In fact, a higher minimum wage would spur economic growth, while also increasing economic fairness.

    read more http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-d-atkinson-phd/minimum-wagemaximum-growt_b_2733108.html

  370. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 8:36 am

    eurekaworker :Minimum Wage/Maximum Growth
    Posted: 02/21/2013 3:20 pm
    Robert D. Atkinson, Ph.D.
    In his State of the Union Address president Obama proposed that Congress increase the minimum wage to $9.00 per hour.
    Almost immediately a chorus of opposition based on neoclassical economics emerged, arguing that such a change would kill job creation. As former Bush Administration economist Greg Mankiw notes, “there is 79 percent agreement among his peers that a minimum wage increases unemployment among young and unskilled workers.” But let’s be clear, what Mankiw really means to say is a 79 percent agreement among neoclassical economists.
    In fact, a higher minimum wage would spur economic growth, while also increasing economic fairness.
    read more http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-d-atkinson-phd/minimum-wagemaximum-growt_b_2733108.html

    You argue against a statement that Mankiw didn’t even make. He refers to young and unskilled worker, while your statement is about overall economic growth. There can be both, where employers begin replacing the unskilled young worker with someone with experience. I would have inserted links to published data confirming this, but I know you would discount it as right wing politics, so I didn’t waste my time.
    By the way……have you come up with any data yet on how many local Eureka businesses have closed down since Walmart came to town? It has been 8 months now.

  371. February 22, 2013 at 8:59 am

    It’s hard to tell. Obviously the Times-Standard is very reluctant to publish negative business news so there is an effective blackout there. We know that one or more retail stores have closed in the Mall since Walmarts arrival, and then there is Shorelines Gallery and the auto parts store in Henderson Center. You drive around Eureka and its starting to look like the hieight of the depression in the 30’s, multiple empty businesses up and down 4th, 5th and 6th streets and in the Henderloin. 5th St. downtown is especially bad. Maybe they should have let the freeway take out 5th st.

    It’s still an option. Sure its true that a freeway would physically divide Old Town from the rest of the city but then real cities have freeways. A robust transportation system is required once a city reaches a certain size.

    Just think about it. A nice infrastructure program to create good jobs. It would take out the blight of south Broadway and the 5th st corridor in one swoop, and would reduce the surplus of commercial property that is available in Eureka.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  372. February 22, 2013 at 9:42 am

    Poll: Strong Support for Raising Minimum Wage

    Washington Wire HOME PAGE »

    Yes another poll-
    .
    via the Wall St. Journal and USA Today, notorious left wingers

    By Tim Hanrahan

    A strong majority of Americans favor President Barack Obama‘s proposal to raise the minimum raise, according to a new poll. Among Republicans, by a slim margin, more support the move than oppose it.

    In the poll from USA Today/Pew Research Center, 71% of Americans back increasing the minimum wage to $9 an hour from $7.25 currently, with 26% opposed. The plan, introduced by Mr. Obama in his State of the Union address, has 87% support among Democrats and 68% support among independents. Among Republicans, 50% back the measure, with 47% opposed.

    People who identified themselves as agreeing with the tea party opposed the minimum wage measure 64% to 32%.

    http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/02/21/poll-strong-support-for-raising-minimum-wage/

  373. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 11:01 am

    Hey, look, EurekaWorker is wearing his Highboldtage skin again!
    Also, @#356: You must not have read much of the posts in this thread, since Bill Holmes (“EurekaWorker”, “Highboldtage”, & likely quite a few Anons in this forum) loves to insult people who don’t agree with his anti-walmart libtard views.

  374. February 22, 2013 at 11:28 am

    WALMART PRESSING FELONY CHARGES AGAINST EMPLOYEE WHO ATE OREO COOKIES

    Walmart is moving forward with felony charges against an employee of an Indiana store who admitted to eating “multiple” Oreo cookies because she said that she couldn’t afford to pay for them with her salary.

    A Portage Police Department report obtained by The Smoking Gun on Thursday said that Penny Winters had been arrested after a Walmart investigation determined she was guilty of theft.

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/21/walmart-pressing-felony-charges-against-employee-who-ate-multiple-oreo-cookies/

    more from the google http://urlet.com/consistently.beverages

  375. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 11:46 am

    Because simply firing her from a job that doesn’t pay enough to live on wouldn’t send a strong enough message to other 99.9% of their employees who are in the same boat. If they could deport her to colonial Australia or cut off her hands they would.

  376. February 22, 2013 at 11:48 am

    You see anon, we have done our own polling and the more strongly anti walmart the Eureka Fair Wage Act is perceived to be, the higher the favorable rating with the voters. Thank you for spreading the word.

    This will prove to be a problem for walmart if they chose to attack us with advertisements.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  377. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 12:32 pm

    highboldtage :You see anon, we have done our own polling and the more strongly anti walmart the Eureka Fair Wage Act is perceived to be, the higher the favorable rating with the voters. Thank you for spreading the word.
    This will prove to be a problem for walmart if they chose to attack us with advertisements.
    have a peaceful day,Bill

    You didn’t highlight the part where she made $11.40 / hr. and had been stealing for 8 years. But it’s unlikely they will advertise at all. They’ll save it for the lawsuit against Eureka to get it from becoming law.

  378. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    ( re-posted)

    Not sure if you read the article Bill, but…….. First, she made $11.40 / hour. Not exactly the minimum wage you rail about.And I’ve spent time in Portage, Indiana. That’s a livable wage there. Second, she’s admitted to doing it for EIGHT YEARS !!!. And lastly Bill….it sounds like you condone breaking the law if you feel like you are underpaid. Where exactly would you draw the line on justifiable criminal acts?

  379. February 22, 2013 at 12:48 pm

    Just speaking for myself, I think that simply firing her would be enough “punishment” if she indeed was guilty of her alleged crime. Felony? That’s crazy.

  380. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 1:26 pm

    eurekaworker :Just speaking for myself, I think that simply firing her would be enough “punishment” if she indeed was guilty of her alleged crime. Felony? That’s crazy.

    alleged crime?? She admitted to doing it for eight years. But just to be clear…..how much and for how many years would it take before you considered it a crime? Maybe you could include an acceptable theft amount in the Fair Wage Act.

  381. That Man
    February 22, 2013 at 1:36 pm

    stealing food because you haven’t eaten in days is and never will be a crime; by definition, show me the victim?..and i show the the woman who took the food.

  382. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    That Man :stealing food because you haven’t eaten in days is and never will be a crime; by definition, show me the victim?..and i show the the woman who took the food.

    I’ll say it again……I’ve been to Portage, Indiana. $11.40 / hr. is a livable wage there. Victim my ass…..she’s a thief.

  383. That Man
    February 22, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    Kathy you want to win the battle ignore the troll, hell go back under the bridge and cut himself. remember what your mom taught you about “bullies” their all hurting on the inside don’t blame societies victims.

  384. That Man
    February 22, 2013 at 1:42 pm

    That Man :
    Kathy you want to win the battle ignore the troll, hell go back under the bridge and cut himself. remember what your mom taught you about “bullies” their all hurting on the inside don’t blame societies victims.

    delete this

  385. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 3:02 pm

    You don’t know anything about that’s woman’s life, how many people she is supporting, what special needs her family may have, etc, Just Watchin. For all you know she could be raising 10 kids with a laid-off husband whose unemployment ran out, high energy or commute costs or mortgage commitments made in better times that don’t leave enough for food. People who cry about multimillionaires having to pay a few percent more, but still less than the rate working class people pay in federal taxes, just prove how asinine they are.

  386. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 3:25 pm

    Like Eurekaworker, you also seem to condone criminal acts so long as the individual has been having a tough time, or feels that they are underpaid. So I’ll ask you the same question…….. do you have a dollar amount in mind that people should be able to steal before being charged with a crime? If they’re really in need, maybe a small store or gas station?

  387. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 3:32 pm

    You condone rich owners paying their workers less than it costs to survive so get off your high horse Watchin. Firing her should have been punishment enough. Filing felony charges and sending her to jail is too harsh. What is legal is not necessarily moral and what is illegal is not necessarily immoral.

  388. Just Watchin
    February 22, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    Anonymous :
    You condone rich owners paying their workers less than it costs to survive so get off your high horse Watchin. Firing her should have been punishment enough. Filing felony charges and sending her to jail is too harsh. What is legal is not necessarily moral and what is illegal is not necessarily immoral.

    As usual, you didn’t answer the question. Let’s hear a dollar amount.

  389. February 22, 2013 at 4:08 pm

    Let me say this again. I am not “condoning” anything.

    Let me repeat.

    COOKIE THEFT. FELONY CHARGES. CRAZY.

    A large proportion of employees steal from their workplace even if it is just pencils and erasers. Even business owners steal from their own business when they take a ten out of the till for lunch.

    Let me ask you. How much hard time should she get for stealing cookies? Five years? Ten years?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  390. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    I don’t think people should be charged with felonies for stealing food to eat. It’s not like she was stealing lobster, filet mignon or champagne. Firing her for theft will make it very difficult for her to find a job. As an ex-con it will be impossible. Since someone with the skill levels she must have had to stay at Walmart for 8 years at less than $12 an hour, she might have confessed to 8 years of theft for the 3 meals and dry bed she’ll get in jail. Billionaires who pay their workers less than the cost of survival and then file felony charges against them for stealing cookies have no room to talk about morality. They bought the legal right to shift their employee costs off onto the taxpayers at the same time they funded politicians trying to reduce or even eliminate funding for the social programs their employees need to survive, and now they are helping to fill our jails with nonviolent offenders who stole to eat.

  391. Goldie
    February 22, 2013 at 4:23 pm

    I agree with you completely #391

  392. Mitch
    February 22, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    I think all caught thieves, even non-violent ones, should be tried for their crimes, and would allocate the government sufficient resources to ensure this happens. The prosecutions, though, should prioritize thefts by amount stolen.

    As soon as the government is done prosecuting bankers and the executives of the large multinational corporations, it can move on to those of us who have stolen less than a billion each. But it should work to the best of its ability to prosecute each major crime involving more than a billion dollars before going after the smaller fish.

    It will then take government prosecutors a while to go through the crimes involving between a million and a billion bucks.

    When the government is done prosecuting those crimes, it should move on to the crimes involving between ten thousand and a million dollars, then those between one hundred and ten thousand.

    Absolutely the very day they’ve finished up with all theft categories listed above, I think the government should throw the book at this cookie thief, and at those who would steal a pen from work! Such behavior is outrageous and unacceptable, not to mention it lacks ambition.

  393. February 22, 2013 at 4:49 pm

    A Perfect Example Of How Walmart Is Taking Over Small Towns

    “The Fairfield High School scoreboard in my Ohio hometown used to advertise local businesses. There was a big ad for Bigg’s — a local grocery franchise — and smaller ads for Fairfield Pizza, Play-It-Again Sports, and more.

    But in the summer of 2011, I visited Fairfield and noticed that the scoreboard was a solid blue and now advertised Walmart as the only sponsor.

    There are four Walmart stores within 15 minutes of the high school stadium. One Supercenter is just a mile away from the old Bigg’s store.

    As of 2011, Bigg’s had closed that location and all of its other stores around Cincinnati. The shopping mall where Bigg’s was located, Cincinnati Mills, is mostly empty now, with many other local businesses shut down.

    Here’s a Google Street View image of how it used to look (other local sponsors are listed on the lower half):”

    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/scoreboard-shows-walmart-taking-over-2013-2#ixzz2Lg98MRf7

  394. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 5:08 pm

    How many empty store fronts at the mall since Walmart announced their opening here?

  395. In A Casey Kasem Voice
    February 22, 2013 at 5:54 pm

    highboldtage :
    Let me say this again. I am not “condoning” anything.
    Let me repeat.
    COOKIE THEFT. FELONY CHARGES. CRAZY.
    A large proportion of employees steal from their workplace even if it is just pencils and erasers. Even business owners steal from their own business when they take a ten out of the till for lunch.
    Let me ask you. How much hard time should she get for stealing cookies? Five years? Ten years?
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    Now let ME repeat: Indiana. ALL theft charges are prosecuted as Class D Felonies. Period. Walmart is not pressing felony charges, the state is.

    A class D felony in that state carries between 6 months to 3 years, to answer your question, and will depend on how much she stole, whether or not she has a history of theft, ETC. (Considering she said she’d been doing this for years, well, that’s not exactly in her favor…) When she gets to court, she’ll more than likely be offered a misdemeanor deal if she pleads guilty, but, regardless, according to Indiana state law she COMMITTED A FELONY. Unlike CA, it seems they don’t fool around with thieves.

    Also, you ARE saying theft is OK, since in her defense you say ‘everybody does it’. Of course that’s what I should expect from a guy who moved to Humboldt just so he could smoke weed quasi-legally…

  396. In A Casey Kasem Voice
    February 22, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    Also, business owners can’t steal from themselves, if they truly OWN the business. It’s not smart to do, ’cause it makes bookkeeping a hell, but they can since it’s their money. Just sayin’.

  397. February 22, 2013 at 6:30 pm

    You are lying about Indiana law she can be charged with misdemeanor theft, it is prosecutorial discretion. Here’s the citation. Not to mention of course that Walmart did not have to press charges. They could have just fired her.

    http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/crime-penalties/petty-theft-indiana-penalties-defense

    Classification and Penalties for Theft in Indiana

    Prosecutors in Indiana have the discretion to charge most theft-related offenses as either “conversion” (a Class A misdemeanor) or “theft” (a Class D felony). (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-43-4-2, § 35-43-4-3).

    Unlike many other states, Indiana does not make any formal distinction among theft offenses (conversion or theft) based purely on the value of the property.

    Indiana law also establishes advisory sentences for each level of felony offense. An advisory sentence is a guideline sentence that a court may voluntarily consider, which falls midway between the minimum sentence and the maximum sentence for the offense. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-2-1.3.)

    Let’s take a closer look at the different levels of theft-based offenses in the state of Indiana.

    Class A Misdemeanor Theft in Indiana. There is no “petty theft” statute in Indiana. Rather, Indiana law refers to this level of theft offense as “conversion,” which is a Class misdemeanor. A person who commits a Class A misdemeanor may receive a term of imprisonment of not more than one year, as well as a fine of not more than $5,000. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-3-2.) The court may suspend any portion of a Class A misdemeanor sentence. (Ind. Code Ann. § 35-50-3-1.)

  398. February 22, 2013 at 6:33 pm

    In A Casey Kasem Voice :
    Also, business owners can’t steal from themselves, if they truly OWN the business. It’s not smart to do, ’cause it makes bookkeeping a hell, but they can since it’s their money. Just sayin’.

    Of course they can steal from themselves. It lowers the tax bill.. It has been done for centuries. You must think the people reading this are really stupid or don’t know anything about real life.

  399. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 22, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    eurekaworker :

    In A Casey Kasem Voice :
    Also, business owners can’t steal from themselves, if they truly OWN the business. It’s not smart to do, ’cause it makes bookkeeping a hell, but they can since it’s their money. Just sayin’.

    Of course they can steal from themselves. It lowers the tax bill.. It has been done for centuries. You must think the people reading this are really stupid or don’t know anything about real life.

    Business owners cannot steal from themselves, if knew the slightest thing about owning and running a business you would understand that.

    And quit calling yourself a worker. You no more work for a living than a child does.

  400. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    Definition of worker
    noun

    1a person who works, in particular:
    [with adjective or noun modifier] a person who does a specified type of work or who works in a specified way:a farm worker she’s a good worker
    an employee, especially one who does manual or non-executive work.

    2a person who achieves a specified thing:he was a bogus worker of miracles

    EurekaWorker is a 2a, a worker

  401. February 22, 2013 at 6:46 pm

    OK “Real Worker” I worked 30 years in the private sector mostly in Nevada in management.

    Now I am retired.

    Now REAL WORKER what is your name and where do you work? Time to put up or shut up.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  402. A REAL Eureka Worker
    February 22, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    You are retired. You do not work for a living and with your obsessive support for the measure that will harm Eureka businesses you show you don’t care about people that are trying to work for a living.

    I love seeing these retirees coming from outside thinking they know more than the Humboldt bumpkins and start telling us what to do. You are not only a pretender but clueless to boot. These new immigrants have too much time on their hands and make local politics their new hobby.

  403. February 22, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    Are you going to tell us your name, “Real worker?” How do we know that you are not sitting in some cublicle in Bentonville?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  404. February 22, 2013 at 7:23 pm

    Many of the 2,500 signatures we gathered were from the real workers you claim will be hurt by raising the minimum wage. I know this because unlike you, I really live here and I personally gathered several hundred sigs and talked to the voters. . It may surprise you but its not hard to find people making less than 12 an hour in Eureka and most of them would like a raise. The sooner the better.

    So you are just spouting more bullshit. Is your cubicle air conditioned? BTW don’t steal any oreos!

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  405. Anonymous
    February 22, 2013 at 8:19 pm

    Ohhh, bill, Ignorant Bill…if an owner “steals” (your word) from his or her business, he is taking from his or her equity, as a draw. He or she is not necessarily resorting to tax fraud, though you seem to condone these types of things if it puts food on their table.

    FIND Yourself.

  406. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 4:59 am

    eurekaworker :A Perfect Example Of How Walmart Is Taking Over Small Towns
    “The Fairfield High School scoreboard in my Ohio hometown used to advertise local businesses. There was a big ad for Bigg’s — a local grocery franchise — and smaller ads for Fairfield Pizza, Play-It-Again Sports, and more.
    But in the summer of 2011, I visited Fairfield and noticed that the scoreboard was a solid blue and now advertised Walmart as the only sponsor.
    There are four Walmart stores within 15 minutes of the high school stadium. One Supercenter is just a mile away from the old Bigg’s store.
    As of 2011, Bigg’s had closed that location and all of its other stores around Cincinnati. The shopping mall where Bigg’s was located, Cincinnati Mills, is mostly empty now, with many other local businesses shut down.
    Here’s a Google Street View image of how it used to look (other local sponsors are listed on the lower half):”
    Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/scoreboard-shows-walmart-taking-over-2013-2#ixzz2Lg98MRf7

    When you copied and pasted Bill, you left out the part where she asked the local mom her opinion, and she said she was thrilled with all that Walmart does for the school.
    But you picked a poor example of Walmart hurting a “small town”. I grew up in a Cincinnati suburb, not far from Fairfield. In the 70s it was little more than a farming community. But the area began an explosive growth period, until today it is one of Greater Cincinnati’s most prosperous and affluent areas. As for Bill’s grocery chain, they are right in the backyard of Kroger, the largest grocery retailer in the country. As for the Cincinnati Mills? It was built in the hayday of mega indoor malls, and was positioned geographically right between two already established malls, Tri-County and Northgate.Given what Fairfield has become, I’d be more inclined to say that Walmart helped it become what it is today.

  407. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 5:07 am

    Anonymous :How many empty store fronts at the mall since Walmart announced their opening here?

    You won’t get an answer to this question, because there are none. But once word gets out that Walmart is the only business in town that has thieves arrested, the dopers and tweakers may wipe out the shelves of the other stores, and only Walmart will be left.

  408. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 7:28 am

    And how would you know that Watchin? I was there the other and there are lots of empty store fronts, some with displays in the windows from other mall stores, but lots of empty space, boarded up space.

  409. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 7:30 am

    LOTS! If I was a retired geek like you with nothing better to do, I’d go to the mall today, count and measure the empty spaces. But lucky for me I have better things to do.

  410. Fed Up with Liberals
    February 23, 2013 at 8:30 am

    Anonymous :
    And how would you know that Watchin? I was there the other and there are lots of empty store fronts, some with displays in the windows from other mall stores, but lots of empty space, boarded up space.

    Those empty store fronts and boarded up spaces have been there for years. For you to blame WalMart for that is dishonest.

  411. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 23, 2013 at 8:37 am

    highboldtage :
    Many of the 2,500 signatures we gathered were from the real workers you claim will be hurt by raising the minimum wage. I know this because unlike you, I really live here and I personally gathered several hundred sigs and talked to the voters. . It may surprise you but its not hard to find people making less than 12 an hour in Eureka and most of them would like a raise. The sooner the better.
    So you are just spouting more bullshit. Is your cubicle air conditioned? BTW don’t steal any oreos!
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    Whereever my cubilcle is bill, at least I am working for a living. You claim that your ballot measure will only affect 140 workers who work for large businesses. Now you claim you have 2,500 signatures because they all want a raise?

    No. I am willing to bet that many of those 2,500 are retirees or welfare people like you who no longer work. Many others I am sure will be found to not to even live in Eureka at all. Still many others will be found to be government workers who have nice secure jobs no matter what negative impact the measure has on the local economy. Finally the rest will be uninformed people who have no knowledge of economics or of the business world. Again, just like you.

  412. February 23, 2013 at 9:07 am

    Whereever my cubilcle is bill, at least I am working for a living.

    Well Gee, can’t we at least have a hint REAL EUREKA WORKER? Is your cubicle east of the Mississippi? Are we getting warmer?

  413. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 9:27 am

    When those 140 have a few more dollars to spend, and they will spend it, increasing demand in other businesses, it will increase owners profits and, hopefully, other employees’ wages. Putting more money into the pockets of those whose consumption is the driver of our economy is what lifts all boats, increasing the size of the pie by changing the size of pieces the owners and labor receive.

  414. February 23, 2013 at 9:44 am

    “You claim that your ballot measure will only affect 140 workers ”

    Where have I claimed that it will only effect 140 workers? Our consensus estimate from the beginning is 1,000 to 1,200 workers may be effected, and we have stated that publicly. Its in our FAQ that has been public since July, 2012. Maybe you need to eat some oreos and get your sugar level back to par.

    “Q. How much cash would flow to the local economy under this ordinance?

    A. If there are 1,000 local employees covered under this ordinance, then we estimate there will be at least $2.5 million annually pumped into the local economy through higher, fairer wages, and the multiplier effect will amplify the gain.”

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/11/23/walmart-and-the-12-minimum-wage-frequently-asked-questions/

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  415. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 9:51 am

    You’re winning the argument with igorant Bill, that’s why he’s making an unfounded personal attack on where you work, realekaworker. Nicely done.

  416. February 23, 2013 at 9:58 am

    If this master debater is claiming to be a REAL EUREKA WORKER then WHERE HE WORKS is crucial to the conversation. Asking him where he works is not a personal attack. Just to be clear.

    Because of course I am a real person and yall know where I live and work and circulate petitions. Now we need to know where REAL EUREKA WORKER (who at this point is an iinternet pixie) really works. He has already evaded the question once.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  417. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 10:03 am

    Find yourself bill and stop creating strawmen to attack. I will take real at his or her word that they really work in Eureka, while you have NEVER done so, yet you call yourself eurekaworker whenever you aren’t posing as highboldtage.

  418. February 23, 2013 at 10:14 am

    So you believe a totally anonymous internet poster over a real verifiable human person? What else do you believe in? This could be a revelation!

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  419. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 10:22 am

    A REAL Eureka Worker :
    You are retired. You do not work for a living and with your obsessive support for the measure that will harm Eureka businesses you show you don’t care about people that are trying to work for a living.
    I love seeing these retirees coming from outside thinking they know more than the Humboldt bumpkins and start telling us what to do. You are not only a pretender but clueless to boot. These new immigrants have too much time on their hands and make local politics their new hobby.

    You mean like this #418? Bill posts information, not attacks. Being suspicious of REAL’s motives for such attacks and hysteria that it will cost jobs against all emperical evidence makes sense. Is his place of work a boiler room to criticize wage increases where ever they pop up or a franchise owner living a luxurious life on the backs of his minimum wage workers?

  420. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 10:23 am

    The facts are, Bill are these: you, in fact are NOT a eureka worker – this is verifiable by your own words.

    I have no reason to disbelieve that Real is in fact a real eureka worker; in fact the only basis for your disbelieve and subsequent strawman is because this person disagrees with your view.

    FIND YO’Self.

  421. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 10:59 am

    The reason I don’t believe Real is a real Eureka worker is because he keeps posting attacks and lies. If he is REAL then he’s REAL stupid.

  422. .5
    February 23, 2013 at 11:26 am

    Do you see the irony in your post?

  423. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 11:27 am

    Please point out any supposed lies, and we can see if in fact they are lies, or that they are just items you disagree with.

    I can’t wait to discuss this afternoon, after taking a couple hours off from my fulltime job hunting anti walmart posts throughout the ole’interwebz…

  424. February 23, 2013 at 11:33 am

    Anonymous :
    fulltime job hunting anti walmart posts throughout the ole’interwebz…

    Like REAL EUEREKA WORKER says, hey its a job. It doesn’t matter where my cubicle is. And the fact that we do it for free? Well according to you we don’t need no stinkin minimum wage no how. Be happy.

  425. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 3:21 pm

    Find yourself, Bill…

    Still waiting for the supposed lies real has told…

  426. February 23, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    Listen up moron, I have not said that “REAL EUREKA WORKER” is lying.
    \
    The comment 422 in not mine.

    What I have done is I have asked REAL EUREKA WORKER to prove he indeed lives in Eureka as I do.

    Can he do it? Doubtful. Most likely he is in Bentonville,

  427. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 23, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    highboldtage :
    Whereever my cubilcle is bill, at least I am working for a living.
    Well Gee, can’t we at least have a hint REAL EUREKA WORKER? Is your cubicle east of the Mississippi? Are we getting warmer?

    My cubicle is in Eureka and that is all you need to know.

    I don’t blame you for trying to change the subject, you got caught in a lie and are embarrassed. Just man up and admit it.

  428. February 23, 2013 at 4:09 pm

    I think you are in Bentonville, You are a paid net whore for the Walton billionaires. Man up and admit it.

  429. February 23, 2013 at 4:13 pm

    If you are indeed in Eureka just man up and start using your name like I do and I will be civil to you I promise. Until you do I will treat you like the coward that you are.

  430. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 23, 2013 at 4:14 pm

    For those of you who believe the nonsense about all the new money pumped into the economy you need to stop listening only to bill and think.

    Sure some will benefit by getting raises. But more will lose out altogether as they lose their jobs or have their hours reduced. Other stores not here yet will avoid Eureka like the plague. Still others will be forced to raise their prices in order to pay the extra cost.

    But the question is really moot. The courts will toss this out. You cannot favor one business over another. It is discriminatory on its face. But the city will be forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars defending this measure before its tossed out. It will also send a clear anti-business message to all businesses thinking about relocating or starting up here.

    bill & his comrades don’t care. They will get their 15 minutes of fame. The rest of us working stiffs will suffer the consequences for years to come.

  431. February 23, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    You are not a worker you are an internet pixie. A coward. Man up and use your name or no one will believe what you say. Anonymous debate points have the weight of a feather.

  432. February 23, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    How much money is the City of Eureka wasting on the bond validation lawsuit, REAL?

    You know the bullshit lawsuit where the city sued everyone?

    Let me refresh your memory.

    http://highboldtage.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/answer-to-the-unconstitutional-actions-of-the-city-of-eureka-pension-obligation-bond-validation/

  433. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 23, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    So bill, does your measure include only full time employees or part time?

    All the other cities that started with large employers only were forced to expand it to all employers large & small. Can you name any city in the country that has only large employers still and if so have they been challenged in court yet?

    Your own FAQ site admits that WalMart and others will probably raise prices and then you dismiss that argument by saying the over all price increase will be insignifant to most people. Maybe that is true maybe not but then you blow your own claim about newly dollars flowing into the local economy.

    By limiting this to only large employers you admit it would devaste those employers.

  434. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:37 pm

    “Listen up moron, I have not said that “REAL EUREKA WORKER” is lying.”

    Listen up dumbass, it is possible to have a conversation with more than one person whilst postin.

    Find YOself.

  435. February 23, 2013 at 4:40 pm

    Now you are making things up.

    Both the Santa Fe and San Francisco initiatives contained exemptions for small business when they passed. In Santa Fe, the city council expanded it to include all businesses a few years later. I don’t know why but there is no indicatiion that they were “forced to.” There was an unsucessvul legal challenge, and the judge ruled that differentiating between businesses by size was a rational fundtion of the city government. The SF ordinance exception had a built in phase out over a couple of years. It was not successfully challenged in court either.

    All of this info is right here in this thread.

  436. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:41 pm

    The city is not suing everyone, dumbass. If you were an attorney you’d realize this. I called and asked the city attorney cindy day.

    Find yourself.

  437. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    BTW, I don’t think High is here either. He’s posting from Oakland.
    Therefore all of his arguments are lies and/or invalid.

    See how easy that is “Bill”?

    Find yourself.

  438. February 23, 2013 at 4:51 pm

    Anonymous :
    The city is not suing everyone, dumbass. If you were an attorney you’d realize this. I called and asked the city attorney cindy day.
    Find yourself.

    She works on Saturdays? How inspiring!

    OK then how much money have they spent on the bond validation lawsuit thats not suing everyone?

  439. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    Did I say that I talked with her today?

    I talked to her about a month ago when you started down this idiotic path. Dumbass.

    Find yourself.

  440. February 23, 2013 at 4:54 pm

    wow that looked like a lawsuit to me but it went by kinda fast.

  441. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    Jeebus you’re a dumbass. No I didnt talk with her today, I spoke to her a month ago when you went down this idiotic path. She said they are NOT suing anyone.

    They haven’t spent anything other than staff time answering your bullshit.

    Find yourself.

  442. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    wow, but you are not a lawyer, so what things “look like” to you really have no relevance.

    Find yourself.

  443. February 23, 2013 at 5:01 pm

    imagine the audacity of a city council,

    a city manager and a city attorney,

    willing to sue all the citizens of the city

    and anyone else who has an interest

    all in order to circumvent the Constitution of

    the State of California

    Because they know damn well that the citizens

    will not approve this bullshit bond issue.

    what they are trying to do is convince a judge and everyone else that short term obligations owed to CalPERS are “bonds” that can be refunded without voter approval as is required under the Constitution of the State of California. These are not bonds that are being refunded. This is fiction.

    Refinancing short term obligations with long term bonds defines fiscal irresponsibility and is indicative of serious problems in the finances of the City of Eureka.

    At the very least the voters of Eureka should be given the chance to vote on this bond issue.

    They have said that they don’t want to vote because of the “cost to the taxpayers” of an election. Yet, they are going to pay some Wall St. parasites hundreds of thousands in fees to float this bullshit bond issue.

    The crony council needs to end this bullshit lawsuit and put the bond issue to a vote of the people as the California Constitution has required since 1879.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  444. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    You’re in Oakland Bill. I said it here, so it must be true.

    Find yourself.

  445. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 5:05 pm

    More cut and paste from tripe already posted by Oakland based poseur Bill Holmes. Imagine the audacity of someone like Bill who posts bullshit as if they are facts and attacks when corrected.

    This thread is about the fair wage ordinance though, given that Bill has lost the argument, it’s typical of him to try and change the subject though.

    Find yourself.

  446. Anonymous
    February 23, 2013 at 5:09 pm

    Apologies for calling Oakland based poseur Bill Holmes a dumbass. (remember, using the Bill Holmes standard, if I say it here it must be true)…

    It’s an insult to dumbasses world wide.

  447. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 5:15 pm

    highboldtage :
    I think you are in Bentonville, You are a paid net whore for the Walton billionaires. Man up and admit it.

    Even if he is inBentonville Bill,he’s still kickin your ass with facts.

  448. February 23, 2013 at 5:19 pm

    Everyone who is actually in Eureka knows that I live in Eureka. Obviously we have several trolls here who don’t live in Eureka. So I don’t get the point about lying about me being in Oakland, it is an obvious lie that will hurt your arguments with locals so you must be playing to a larger audience. Oh well, fail.

  449. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 5:20 pm

    eurekaworker :
    Now you are making things up.
    Both the Santa Fe and San Francisco initiatives contained exemptions for small business when they passed. In Santa Fe, the city council expanded it to include all businesses a few years later. I don’t know why but there is no indicatiion that they were “forced to.” There was an unsucessvul legal challenge, and the judge ruled that differentiating between businesses by size was a rational fundtion of the city government. The SF ordinance exception had a built in phase out over a couple of years. It was not successfully challenged in court either.
    All of this info is right here in this thread.

    Bottom line…..small businesses,who thought they were getting an advantage, did not.

  450. February 23, 2013 at 5:21 pm

    Bottom line, municipal city minimum wage ordinances are legal and constututional and have never been successfully challenged in court.

  451. February 23, 2013 at 5:28 pm

    Just Watchin :

    highboldtage :
    I think you are in Bentonville, You are a paid net whore for the Walton billionaires. Man up and admit it.

    Even if he is inBentonville Bill,he’s still kickin your ass with facts.

    From what I can see REAL EUREKA WORKER is fact free. He hasn”t posted a single fact that I can see, just mostly whining and gratuitous personal attacks on me. Internet fluff.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  452. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 5:32 pm

    Eurekaworker….I didn’t hear anything about your post that Walmart destroyed Fairfield ???

  453. February 23, 2013 at 5:37 pm

    The person who wrote the Fairfiield article thinks that Walmart has completely taken over her old home town. http://www.businessinsider.com/scoreboard-shows-walmart-taking-over-2013-2#ixzz2Lg98MRf7 She has presented some good anectdotal evidence.

  454. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    You post “facts”, assuming no one will dispute them. Sometimes, the truth gets in the way.

  455. February 23, 2013 at 6:06 pm

    10 Things Minimum Wage Haters Don’t Want To Admit

    a slide show from huffpost

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/minimum-wage-benefits_n_2689246.html

  456. Just Watchin
    February 23, 2013 at 6:37 pm

    eurekaworker :
    10 Things Minimum Wage Haters Don’t Want To Admit
    a slide show from huffpost
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/minimum-wage-benefits_n_2689246.html

    And don’t miss the stories about Kim and Kanye !!!! That HuffPost is some serious journalism !!!!! Give me a break.

  457. February 23, 2013 at 8:06 pm

    40% of Americans Now Make Less Than 1968 Minimum Wage

    http://thecontributor.com/40-americans-now-make-less-1968-minimum-wage

  458. The Artist Formerly Known as ZER0
    February 23, 2013 at 9:54 pm

    Why is it that whenever anyone challenges anything Bill claims, he calls their questions/comments irrelevant by nature of not being ‘locals’ rather than posting links to sources or answering anything? Why does he take such an isolationist POV with everything, going as far as ridiculously demanding the names and locations of posters, as though it’s some kind of Gestapo shakedown? Why does he tell people to do their own research rather than answer ANYTHING?

    Think about it: If Bill was a salesman trying to sell something to you, and rather than answering questions you had for him about his product, he told you, “Use the google and find it yourself”, would you buy the product he was selling? But then, Bill isn’t a salesman, now is he? He just collects social security from the tax money of people who ACTUALLY work for a living, whether they’re in Bentonville or wherever else.

    He’s also very liberal (I made a funny?) with “data” when he seems to post facts. In post #372, he lists Shorelines Gallery and “the auto parts store in Henderson Center” as businesses that have closed since Walmart has opened. I can’t speak for the anonymous auto parts store in Henderson Center since I don’t get out that way too much, but I live 2 blocks from Shorelines Gallery and I can tell you (as anyone who lives in Old Town could) that they had signs up for MONTHS saying they were retiring, yet Bill implies it’s because of Walmart’s arrival.

    BTW Bill, linking your own blog as a source for your info, as you attempted in post #433, is hardly credible; In this forum and elsewhere you only copy-paste the parts of news stories that support your arguments, rather than the whole things.

    Lastly, for the lulz:
    Highboldtage, #417: “yall know where I live and WORK”, & “He has already evaded the question once”
    Highboldtage, #452: “He hasn”t posted a single fact that I can see, just mostly whining and gratuitous personal attacks on me. Internet fluff.”
    I’m not sure my Irony Detector (purchased for $3.99 @ Walmart) can handle these levels… Clearly the kind of pot Bill is used to isn’t associated with that expression about kettles being black.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Old Town’s Friendly Neighborhood Hitokiri

  459. The Artist Formerly Known as ZER0
    February 23, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    More about Shorelines Gallery owners retiring: http://eurekamainstreet.org/node/945
    Are you going to claim/imply that they closed Sea Breeze in 2011 because they knew Walmart was coming, and would “crush them”, and that they closed Shoreline for similar reasons? If I recall, I believe one of the owners’ health was a contributing factor as well, but maybe Zoltar, the great gypsy, just tipped them off… yeah, right.

    I’ve lived in Eureka for about 6 years now, and since my primary mode of transit is the bus and my bicycle, I really didn’t know much about an “auto parts store in Henderson Center”, but as a guy who’s such an advocate for Eureka’s small businesses, you’d think Bill would at least know the name of a place that’s been in Eureka since the ’70s…

    Using the google, I learned that the anonymous auto store was called Finnegan & Nason Auto Supply. According to Fred’s Humboldt Blog on Oct 2 2012, the current owner had posted a sign stating he’d “semi- retired”, but the writer of the blog says he’s not sure whether he just “threw in the towel”. After doing a bit of investigation, I also learned that one of it’s founders, the late Mr. Nason, died a few years back, which could also explain some of its decline. Regardless, it’s far-fetched at best to believe that our tiny Walmart’s tiny auto parts section was what shut them down.

    Have a peaceful day,
    Old Town’s Friendly Neighborhood Hitokiri

  460. Anonymoose
    February 23, 2013 at 11:22 pm

    This thread should be re-named “Eureka Fair Wage Act – Whatever you think, it’s wrong unless it’s in line with their opinion

  461. February 24, 2013 at 6:26 am

    Hey coward fornerly known as ZERO,

    Your very first post on this thread ( #211 for anyone who cares) was a cowardly abusive ad hominem attack on me and the intitiative campaign. You haven’t grown a spine or gotten any smarter since then.

    Maybe someday a Eureka resident who is sincerely opposed to this inititiative will come on here with the stones to use their own name and we can have a civil debate that will inform the voters.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  462. February 24, 2013 at 6:38 am

    Its ironic that several of you spineless trolls have attacked me right in this thread of on the one hand being an “immigrant” (code for capetbagger, outsider) and on the other hand being an “isolationist/.”

    See that’s how you separate the local trolls from the Bentoonville characters. Its POV. For some in Humboldt I have only been here six years so I am an “outsider” even though I am native born Californian. Of course if your POV is BENTOONVILLE then I might look like an isolationist.

    But the Fair Wage Movemnet is national and internatiional as you will note as you read our blog.

    http://fairwages.org

    This reminds me of last summer when I was in the Henderloin collecting signatures at the Farmer’s Market and I ran into Virginia Bass. She just happened to mention that she had been called a fascist and a socialsit all in one week. I had called her a fascist ahd some of her Republican friends had called her a commie.

    I like Virginia on a oersonal level. But lets face it she’s very conservative. She understands that politicians of any hue need a thick skin.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  463. February 24, 2013 at 7:21 am

    “By the way……have you come up with any data yet on how many local Eureka businesses have closed down since Walmart came to town? It has been 8 months now”. #371 “Just Watchin” asks the question btw not REAL EUREKA WORKER.

    That was the question.

    I answered:

    “It’s hard to tell. Obviously the Times-Standard is very reluctant to publish negative business news so there is an effective blackout there. We know that one or more retail stores have closed in the Mall since Walmarts arrival, and then there is Shorelines Gallery and the auto parts store in Henderson Center. You drive around Eureka and its starting to look like the hieight of the depression in the 30′s, multiple empty businesses up and down 4th, 5th and 6th streets and in the Henderloin. 5th St. downtown is especially bad. Maybe they should have let the freeway take out 5th st. ”

    Now let us consider what is going to happen when walmart does its 100,000 sq. foot expansion here in Eureka like they did in Crescent City.

    UPDATE Attn: Small Businesses in Eureka & Humboldt: Wal-Mart Is Going to Crush You……

    Ray’s Food Place to close in Crescent City

    Written by Kyle Curtis January 16, 2013 10:48 am

    The Ray’s Food Place grocery store in Crescent City is closing as of Feb. 3, the store’s owners announced Wednesday. The decision was made “due to an increased presence of retail competitors and the continued decline in the economic climate,” parent company C&K Maket, Inc. said in a press release. http://www.triplicate.com/News/Breaking-News/Rays-Food-Place-to-close-in-Crescent-City

    Let’s DO THE MATH.

    100,000 ADDITIONAL SQUARE FEET of retail space is equal to one hundred (100) 1,000 square foot “shoppes” in Old Town or fifty (50) 2,000 square foot “shoppes” in Old Town, Fortuna, Arcata, Cutten, or even twenty-five (25) 4,000 square foot “emporiums” in the Henderloin or anywhere else in Humboldt County. These retail spaces will become redundant. Surplus. Vacant.

    Or maybe you think we have too many shoppes and emporia in Eureka, Arcata, Fortuna, Garberville, and elsewhere in Humboldt County?

    Get the Picture?

    from The Tripllicate Crescent City

    The wait’s nearly over. After more than a year of shifting store merchandise and non-stop construction, Walmart will begin inviting shoppers into its newly expanded store on Wednesday. The expansion adds nearly 100,000 square feet to the Crescent City Walmart, said store manager Nick Gonnella. The new Walmart Supercenter will include a full grocery store with a deli and a bakery as well as produce, meat and dairy departments. The newly remodeled store will also include a hair salon, a Subway and a new Java Hut, Gonnella said.“We’re one of the largest expansions square footage-wise in all of California,” he said. “We started as a pretty small Walmart store and to grow by 100,000 square feet was no easy task.”

    http://www.triplicate.com/News/Local-News/Supercenter-cuts-ribbon-Wednesday

  464. February 24, 2013 at 7:28 am

    ZERO #462: “He’s also very liberal (I made a funny?) ”

    Yes its funny, its hysterical. It is proof that you are nowhere near Eureka or Humboldt County.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  465. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 7:49 am

    Zero, the usual case when a business owner retires is they sell the business. When they can’t sell the business because of the economy, they close it, like the owners of Shoreline Gallery did.

  466. February 24, 2013 at 8:00 am

    “Cities, too, have enacted laws raising pay for low-wage workers. In 2003, Santa Fe, New Mexico adopted a citywide $8.50 an hour living-wage law with regular cost-of-living increases. At the time, Sam Goldenberg, a business leader, predicted that the law “would be a disaster for the businesses in Santa Fe.” And restaurateur Al Lucero called the plan economically irresponsible and argued that “people will be so content with $8.50 or $10.50 an hour that they’ll have no desire to improve themselves.”

    Nearly 10 years later, the rate is now $10.29 an hour, and Santa Fe has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the state at 5.1 percent. Jeff Mitchell, a senior research scientist at the University of New Mexico’s Bureau of Business and Economic Research, found “no evidence of adverse effects” from the wage hike. Santa Fe’s tourism industry is doing fine. Travel + Leisure magazine last year listed Santa Fe in its top 10 U.S. and Canadian travel destinations for the 11th consecutive year.

    In 2003, San Francisco voters also adopted a citywide minimum-wage law. The Golden Gate Restaurant Association called it a job killer that would “bankrupt many restaurants.” The Association of Realtors said that many hospitality industry workers were “likely to receive pink slips and join the ranks of the unemployed.”

    Wrong again. A 2007 study by University of California economists found that after San Francisco’s minimum wage went up, restaurant growth was higher in the city than in neighboring East Bay cities. In December 2012, the city’s unemployment rate was 6.5 percent, well below the statewide average, and job growth in bars and restaurants has led the region’s post-recession recovery.

    In November, voters in Albuquerque and San Jose passed ballot measures that will raise the minimum wage for workers in those cities. Albuquerque’s citywide minimum wage rose from $7.50 to $8.50 per hour last month and will automatically adjust in future years with inflation. In San Jose, the minimum wage will increase from $8 per hour — the current minimum wage in California — to $10 per hour starting next month and will adjust automatically in future years to keep pace with the rising cost of living.”

    -Peter Drier, Raising the Minimum Wage is Good for Business

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-dreier/raising-the-minimum-wage-_b_2750336.html

  467. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 8:28 am

    eurekaworker :Target Janitors to strike in Minnesota
    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2013/02/23/workers-cleaning-target-stores-threaten-to-strike-minneapoli%e2%80%8bs-st-paul-minnesota/

    Once again Bill, a little deceptive with the headlines. These workers do not work for Target. They work for a company that does cleaning at a number of businesses in the Twin Cities. Using your logic, when workers strike against their companies, and that company has a federal contract to perform work at a federal facility, then the government is the bully?

  468. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:42 am

    Splitting those hairs very finely there Watcher. Janitors who clean Target can honestly be called Target janitors regardless who directly signs their paycheck. The money comes from Target.

  469. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:43 am

    Let me make it clearer. If I work for Merry Maids and clean your house every day, I would still be your maid even though you pay Merry Maids and they pay me.

  470. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:49 am

    More attacks from Oakland Bill, (see, he’s from Oakland, as much as “real” is because I say so here on the interwebz).

    Find yourself my deluded brother. When you do, hop back on the greyhound and come back up from Oakland.

  471. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:52 am

    Watcher is not splitting hairs there, friend, Oakland Bill is. They do NOT WORK FOR TARGET. They are NOT TARGET EMPLOYEES anymore than the merry maids would be yours; neither you nor Target are responsible to them in the same way their employers are.

    Nice try though.

    FIND YoSELF.

  472. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 8:53 am

    Anonymous :Splitting those hairs very finely there Watcher. Janitors who clean Target can honestly be called Target janitors regardless who directly signs their paycheck. The money comes from Target.

    If you watched the video on the link, these same people also clean for Kohls, Home Depot, and a number of other businesses. I suppose that they get to pick which one they actually “work” for. If you worked at Lockheed, for example, in a department working on a government project, do you work for the government?

  473. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:54 am

    Well its almost lunchtime over herein Bentonville.

    See ya’ll in a few.

  474. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 8:59 am

    Yes, Watcher, you do work for the government if you are doing contract work for them and if you hire a Merry Maids to clean your house, she is your maid even if you pay Merry Maids and they pay her.

  475. February 24, 2013 at 9:02 am

    Enjoy your lunch. Stay away from the Walmart GMO foods though. I am sure they are labeled.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-is-going-to-sell-monsantos-genetically-modified-corn-and-it-wont-be-labeled-2012-8

  476. February 24, 2013 at 9:11 am

    Here you go. I agree that the owner of this blog can publish my IP address without any blowback or whining from me, as long as the same applies to you. Your IP address gets published too. I am not talking about everyone here, just you.

    This woul be the ip from the last posts by REAL EUREKA WORKER, ZERO, just watchin and anon 476. For me that would be eurekaworker and highboldtage.

    Fair enough?

    Nothing to hide is there?

    Or will it just create another Heraldo conspiracy theory with you dead enders?

  477. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 9:26 am

    Anonymous :
    Yes, Watcher, you do work for the government if you are doing contract work for them and if you hire a Merry Maids to clean your house, she is your maid even if you pay Merry Maids and they pay her.

    With all the medical advances in recent years, there is still no cure for stupid. Let me ask you Anon…..when you’re flippin those burgers, do you work for McDonalds or for the people buying them? And don’t forget to ask if they want fries with that!!!

  478. Goldie
    February 24, 2013 at 9:47 am

    Eurekaworker, you have no reason to prove anything to this jerk. He’s just baiting you. Your group did a great job of getting fair wage concerns on the ballot. There could be better uses of your time than providing him someone to argue with. There is a cure for trolls, let them simmer alone in their own arrogance.

  479. February 24, 2013 at 9:57 am

    Thank You Goldie.

    The problem is that the voters, the people of Eureka, deserve an open and honest debate on this issue because its not a huge thing like a constitutiional amendment, its just a municipal ordinance in a small city in Calfornia, it certainly can and will impact their lives. We of course think it will be for the better.

    If that debate is to occur here on the Humboldt Herald, a local opponent who is willing to use his or her name will need to come forward for civil debate. Without this kind of debate democracy cannot function. Once that occurs the trolls will be ignored and drowned out.

  480. Goldie
    February 24, 2013 at 10:37 am

    Dude, you are way down in the caverns of the comment section. The real life equivalent is 1 in the morning in a dive neighborhood bar with three old farts drunk, slobbering and saying the same ole things over and over, while the bored bartender is waiting to go home.

  481. February 24, 2013 at 10:52 am

    Like Sec. Rumsfeld said, you go drinking in the bars ya got, not the bars you wish you had when you started that discretionary binge.

    In Humboldt County at the moment the good ship Herald is one of the few venues where anything can be debated but there are some holes in the hull for sure.

  482. Goldie
    February 24, 2013 at 11:06 am

    Carry on.

  483. February 24, 2013 at 11:09 am

    You too and thanks again. We will be asking for your vote.

  484. A REAL Eureka worker
    February 24, 2013 at 11:29 am

    I don’t know where this famed Bentonville is but bill must be terrified of its residents. bill did you do something bad there?

    Perhaps if you were a real Eurekaworker you would get out more and see the real world instead of hunched over your little computer posting 16 hours a day. Just because some stores closed it doesn’t mean they closed because of Walmart. Stores close all the time and they did so for decades before Walmart arrived in my town.

    Using your strange logic of everything being blamed on Walmart, a new hardware store opened up in Old Town a week or two ago. Is that because of Walmart also? Last week there was a serious car wreck in downtown Eureka, that wasn’t because of Walmart either.

  485. Z3R0
    February 24, 2013 at 2:34 pm

    Once again, Bill manages to insult and diffuse people who challenge him rather than reply in a fashion that answers anything, or accuses them of not being ‘local’ as if it is some sort of mitigating factor. No response to my comments about Seabreeze, I notice, just more deflection because you CAN’T say anything about it, because it had nothing to do with walmart.

    Concerning those janitors, I’ll use a local example: Local security guards work for Securitas, and can be seen at the theater, Grocery Outlet, ETC. Securitas is contracted to work by those places to have a guard there, but they’re Securitas’s employees. The theater’s manager can’t tell them what to do, nor does he pay them, because they’re employed by Securitas. Bill seems not to grasp this, but will imply that it is so because it supports his argument. He also seems to think that walmart killed the CC Ray’s Food Place, which is a stretch; my father is a private distributor in CC and I know that the people running that store (and Shop Smart, for that matter) are more than a little shiesty, and if they blamed walmart for their closure they prolly did so simply because its so trendy to do so. I’m amazed he also didn’t claim that

    Also, for the sake of the thread, Bentonville Arkansas is the home of walmart, showing yet again that Bill must sincerely believe that they have some kind of team of internet ninjas that hunt down threads like this just to troll them. (After all, ANYONE who can’t see the OBVIOUS TRUTH that what Bill suggests is infallible must be a professional character assassin paid by the Waldens to defame him, as they’ve done so many times before…)

    BTW, if you felt like looking up my IP, you’ll see Ramone’s, Old Town Coffee & Chocolates, and the CoOp are the wifi hotspots I frequent, but if you did that then you’d be forced to expand your repertoire of insults beyond ‘outsider’. Also, if I wasn’t a local, how would I know about Zoltar, genius?

  486. February 24, 2013 at 3:25 pm

    So just for the record ZERO it’s OK with you if the Herald publishes your iPs, since they are just Old Town Hotspots? How about you, REAL Eureka Worker? Same with you? OK to publish your IPs?

  487. February 24, 2013 at 3:34 pm

    A REAL Eureka worker :
    I don’t know where this famed Bentonville is but bill must be terrified of its residents. bill did you do something bad there?
    Perhaps if you were a real Eurekaworker you would get out more and see the real world instead of hunched over your little computer posting 16 hours a day. Just because some stores closed it doesn’t mean they closed because of Walmart. Stores close all the time and they did so for decades before Walmart arrived in my town.
    Using your strange logic of everything being blamed on Walmart, a new hardware store opened up in Old Town a week or two ago. Is that because of Walmart also? Last week there was a serious car wreck in downtown Eureka, that wasn’t because of Walmart either.

    This is funny shit. There is no proof here that you are anywhere near Eureka. OK with you if the Herald publishes your IPs from this thread boyo?

  488. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 3:54 pm

    Hey Bill,

    We don’t see your ip addy

    You’re in Oakland. We know it. You know it. I say it here on the web, so it must be so, and I am using your standard of saying something unsubstantiated about someone and presenting it as fact.

    In fact, even if you show a Eureka IP, I don’t believe it’s real – you’re simply using an IP anonymiser.

    Find yourself, Boyo.

  489. February 24, 2013 at 4:15 pm

    There you go back to anonymous, scuttling like a cockroach when the light switch goes on.

    Let’s put this in perspective. You claim to be posting from a wifi hotspot but you don’t want your IP posted up here publicly. Why woulld you care if Ramone’s IP is posted here?

    A child could see through this lie.

  490. February 24, 2013 at 4:33 pm

    One more time for anyone reading this bs about me being in Oakland.

    Here is my personal blog. Not only am I in Eureka but I am the only one in Eureka that answered the bullshit lawsuit foisted on us by the Crony Council.

    http://highboldtage.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/answer-to-the-unconstitutional-actions-of-the-city-of-eureka-pension-obligation-bond-validation/

    That is proof I am in Eureka and proof that these trolls are lying about this. So if they are lying about this what are the odds they are lying about the rest of it?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  491. February 24, 2013 at 4:37 pm

    What is the longest thread ever on the Herald? We must be getting close we are near 500 comments. I seem to remember a long one about the Marina Center.

  492. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Longest thread or longest pissing match??

  493. February 24, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    How about you Just Watchin are you willing to have your IP posted here? You fit the profile of a Florida Tea Partier quite well but I am not totally convinced you are in Florida.

    If you haven’t been lying about your location you have nothng to hide right?

  494. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 5:09 pm

    highboldtage :
    How about you Just Watchin are you willing to have your IP posted here? You fit the profile of a Florida Tea Partier quite well but I am not totally convinced you are in Florida.
    If you haven’t been lying about your location you have nothng to hide right?

    Sorry, but I’m not exactly tech savvy. What does “IP” stand for, and where would I find it. And if it would make you happy, tell me what state you would like me to be in. But please……don’t make it one with a state income tax.

  495. February 24, 2013 at 5:31 pm

    When you post a comment on a wordpress blog the owner can see your IP address “internet protocol” and ip addresses can be traced to general locations. Its a good bullshit filter.

    So you don’t have to do anything except agree to let the owner here publish your IP and I have already agreed they can publish mine if they publish yours so do we have agreement?

    Is it ok if they publish our IPs in the interest of truth?

    Surely the Tea Party is interested in truth?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  496. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 5:39 pm

    Bill’s out by the estuary right now, just across from Alameda…he can see the Trib Tower from where he sits.

    See, just like Bill, I can spout off and present my own version of the truth…if I say it here, it must be true.

    Find yourself. I found you – in Oakland.

  497. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 5:40 pm

    highboldtage :
    When you post a comment on a wordpress blog the owner can see your IP address “internet protocol” and ip addresses can be traced to general locations. Its a good bullshit filter.
    So you don’t have to do anything except agree to let the owner here publish your IP and I have already agreed they can publish mine if they publish yours so do we have agreement?
    Is it ok if they publish our IPs in the interest of truth?
    Surely the Tea Party is interested in truth?
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

    I thought the pissing match was about who was faking that they lived in Eureka? Believe me, from what I remember of my visits there, that’s the LAST place I’d want people to think I lived. And have you decided where you’d like me to be living??

  498. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    I can’t wait till this goes to the voters and people find out exactly who “the fair wage folks” are, with pictures, interviews and everything…the Folks will sink their own campaign; Hell, James Decker’s blog links to porn sites, yep that’s the guy I want setting wage policy in Eureka.

    Please, once you’re back from Oakland Bill, let us know when you’re court date is happening with the bond refi – I promise I will be there to watch in the audience…PROMISE.

    It will be just too delishhhh to miss you getting destroyed in court.

  499. February 24, 2013 at 5:43 pm

    Is that a yes or no on the OK to post your IP, Just Watchin?

  500. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 5:49 pm

    JW says he’s in Florida, OaklandBill. Real Eureka Workers says he works in Eureka. He’s destroyed you in arguments about this issue, and all you’ve done is launch ad hominem attacks on him and create strawman arguments asking where he live…when all the while you are posting from Hegenburger Road in Oakland, near Alameda, in that big ass pot dispensary parking lot.

    FIND YOURSELF

  501. February 24, 2013 at 5:54 pm

    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    -Mahatma Gandhi

  502. February 24, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    This is how you stand up to cybertrash punks, bullies, cowards and liars, folks.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  503. February 24, 2013 at 6:00 pm

    I’ve been around since Usenet Just Watchin I have seen every trick in the book.

    Your mission here is to destroy this blog.

    Now put up or shut up.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  504. Just Watchin
    February 24, 2013 at 6:01 pm

    Bill…..any potential Fair Wage voter visiting this blog is going to leave thinking it’s leader is a tantrum throwing adolescent. I can’t think of any way that is helpful to your cause. You’ve lost focus…….the Trolls are winning.

  505. February 24, 2013 at 6:04 pm

    No one here in Humboldt gives a shit what some tea party moron in Florida thinks, not even our local morons.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  506. February 24, 2013 at 6:07 pm

    How Raising Wages Lifts the Economy- Economist Richard Wolff Interviewed by Bill Moyers

    February 22, 2013 by eurekaworker in Articles and tagged Bill Moyers, Richard Wolff | Permalink

    http://billmoyers.com/content/richard-wolff-on-how-raising-the-minimum-wage-lifts-america/

    “The minimum wage has not always left a single income-earner for a family of three so far below the poverty line. In 1968, when minimum wage was at it’s highest point ever, that same breadwinner would have made $19,245 a year in today’s dollars — roughly a third more than he or she makes now.

    In 1981, in an attempt to fight inflation, the minimum wage was frozen at $3.35 per hour despite the rising cost of living. It wasn’t bumped up until 1990, by which point it had fallen well below the poverty line for a family of two (about $2,500 lower than for a family of three). From 1997 to 2007, the minimum wage remained stuck at $5.15 per hour, as, once again, the cost of living continued to increase.”

    Rethinking the Minimum Wage, Bill Moyers:

    http://billmoyers.com/2013/02/22/rethinking-our-minimum-wage/

  507. Anonymous
    February 24, 2013 at 6:28 pm

    Bill has posted empiric evidence that raising the minimum wage helps the whole community prosper. You have only a business commissioned study that claimed raising the minimum wage correlates with fewer teenagers getting jobs, not fewer jobs. That could be explained easily. A greater percentage of our jobs are minimum wage and unemployment is high so more adults are competing with kids for them. That is not a good reason to pay a less than living wage, just the opposite. Is it odd that the same people who oppose raising the minimum wage (or even having a minimum wage) want to cut all social programs, including Social Security, Medicaid and WIC for the working poor, (as well as education) but always demanding more tax cuts and preparation for war.

  508. February 24, 2013 at 6:58 pm

    Thank you 510. One of the goals of a political movement win or lose is to educate the voters and the public at large about the issue and we are succeeding at that.

    Basically the issue of raising the minimum wage is not even controversial it has overwhelming support across the political spectrum. However the shills for big biz ( who employ the majority of low wage workers) will go to any length to defeat or discredit it.

    The only question is how much should it be raised. Democrats here now have some wiggle room thanks to Pres. Obama, they can support the national 9 dollar proposal, they can support our local two tier 12 dollar /small biz exempt proposal, or they can support both.

    But whatever 510 you get it, wages must go up!

    Thanks.

  509. Just Watchin
    February 25, 2013 at 5:06 am

    highboldtage :No one here in Humboldt gives a shit what some tea party moron in Florida thinks, not even our local morons.
    have a peaceful day,Bill

    I’m so glad you have allowed me to continue living in Florida. Going to be sunny and 86 degrees today. Perfect day for a trip to the gambling boat in Cocoa Beach!! But you’re being terribly hard on all the residents of Humboldt, calling them all morons.

  510. REAL HUMBOLDT TEA BAGGER
    February 25, 2013 at 5:29 am

    Thank you so much for representing us Brother! The truth is there aren’t very many of us, we are mostly dumb as stumps and all these violent pot smokers around here have us changing our Depends way too often. We need people like you to save us and protect us since Jesus has forsaken us apparently.

  511. That One Reporter Guy
    February 25, 2013 at 9:25 am

    “Your comment is awaiting moderation”? Wow, just wow… Better make sure I didn’t say something crippling to your argument, eh? Censorship is the devil, man.

  512. Anonymous
    February 25, 2013 at 9:29 am

    “It is foolish to listen to someone who won’t listen to you.”
    -Seijuro Hiko

  513. That Irritated Reporter Guy
    February 25, 2013 at 9:42 am

    …And it’s gone. Unbelievable.
    Apparently the moderator of this site won’t allow me to post links to news articles that argue with the view of #509. What-effing-ever, man.
    I guess they’re right: “control the media and you control the people”.
    Now as I said in my post that was “moderated” (read: “censored”), I stated that if anyone allows Highboldtage or whoever to post you IP address, it can be blocked, meaning you unable to post here anymore. I guess they’ve got that covered, though, since if you post anything this Bill guy wouldn’t like it vanishes. Makes you wonder if he knows the mod.

  514. February 25, 2013 at 9:52 am

    Irritated, you are very confused. The owners/mods of this blog already have your ip address and can block you anytime they want to, assuming of course that they have normal access to blog control panel. Don’t take my word for it. Open up a free wordpress blog of your own and make a comment on it.

    Also the askiment spam filter blocks comments with multiple links in it so try posting comments with only one link it should go through if you haven’t violated another spam rule.
    See I am being heloful.

    If you think I can make posts that I don’t like vanish just go back to the top of these 500 comments and start reading. That is really funny.

    I am fine with debating you. Why don’t you use your real name?

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  515. Dumb as a Stump
    February 25, 2013 at 10:08 am

    Reagan PR guy to head Eureka Reporter Opinion page

    November 1, 2007HeraldoLeave a commentGo to comments

    Need more GOP talking points? The Eureka Reporter’s got just the thing! A public relations official for Republican deity Ronald Reagan is stepping in as editor of the opinion pages.

    Peter D. Hannaford, author of The Quotable Ronald Reagan and several books about the late president, will apply his skills to any letters or editorials you submit for publication.

    Makes you lunge for the nearest pencil, doesn’t it?

    Mr. Hannaford is a member of APCO, a “global communication consultancy” which specializes in “pushing the boundaries of communication.”

    APCO boasts the powers to help a company “shed its international reputation as a bully.”

    Priceless!

    If Hannaford’s bully-be-gone mojo is international, he’ll have Humboldt County buffing Rob Arkley’s shoes in no time.

  516. One Minus One
    February 25, 2013 at 10:09 am

    Don’t get so mad, Reporter; Bill just feeds on it. Plus, it stops making HIM look bad when others lose their temper.

    Still, if any Fairwage defenders would like some “empirical” data that says raising the Minimum Wage is bad, how about this? I’ll bet Bill will REALLY get a kick out of it.
    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Raising+Minimum+Wage+is+bad

  517. One Minus One
    February 25, 2013 at 10:15 am

    #520, did you post in the right place…? Your post is an extended Arkley-bashing metaphor. This thread is about people bashing on walmart.

  518. Anonymous
    February 25, 2013 at 10:55 am

    One Minus posted a link to a google page of opinions, all of the “con” side rehashing the same point, that raising the minimum wage means less jobs for teenagers. The other side of that coin is that adults are doing more minimum wage jobs now because that is what more jobs pay now. Raising the minimum wage will help support the families of the adults who are now doing them. If I had my choice between flipping burgers and wiping butts for the same pay, flipping burgers is easier work.

  519. Anonymous
    February 25, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    Find yourself, Bill. Howzz the weather in OakTown?

  520. Mitsubishi A6M
    February 26, 2013 at 2:54 pm

    Anonymous :
    One Minus posted a link to a google page of opinions, all of the “con” side rehashing the same point, that raising the minimum wage means less jobs for teenagers. The other side of that coin is that adults are doing more minimum wage jobs now because that is what more jobs pay now. Raising the minimum wage will help support the families of the adults who are now doing them.

    Of course the link I posted was full of “con side” opinions — I think raising the minimum wage is a bad idea! Additionally, Bill’s not exactly keen on posting anything beyond opinions and ‘anecdotal evidence’ himself, so why are my links to the opinions I think less valid?

    I was a teenager four years ago, so I think the teenage/young adult unemployment rate is kind of a big deal. It’s difficult to get a job unless you have prior work experience of some sort, and less jobs for kids mean they’re screwed in the future when they have no work experience. Continuing down that line of thought, it means they’ll live at home with ma & pa, or become homeless — and we’ve already got PLENTY of homeless people here in Old Town, don’t you think?

    Also, how exactly is adults doing jobs for minimum wage ‘the other side of the coin’ of young workers losing jobs or not being able to get them in the first place? I’m not sure you used the right expression, unless you’re suggesting that it’s better that the ‘adults’ get jobs over younger people…?

    Anonymous :
    If I had my choice between flipping burgers and wiping butts for the same pay, flipping burgers is easier work.

    Are you referring to IHSS workers by this…? Whether or not you were, the attitude you displayed is disgusting. People in this community (or, rather, much of northern California) won’t do jobs they think are ‘beneath them’, because they’re ‘better than that’, rather than being happy to have a job at all and doing their best. There are PLENTY of people who actively choose to be unemployed because they feel like they’re ‘owed something’, and public schools practically teach that anymore. It’s revolting.

    I DO think IHSS workers are getting shafted by getting so little for the jobs they do around here, but I’m pretty sure that they’re a union, meaning (as Bill stated in post #235) that they may not even be eligible for the pay increase associated with the Fair Wage Act unless the organization itself decided to pay them that amount. (I know they are a union in Crescent City, because a friend of mine got shafted over union dues, so i assume they are in Eureka as well, but I confess I don’t know.)

  521. February 26, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Here you go ZERO a meta analysis that shows ZERO disemployment among teenagers utilizing the data from 1,000 studies. If you want to see the nice little graph to to fairwages.org. You and others can go to the MSNBC link below to read the entire article. It also has the nice little graph.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Hristos Doucouliagos and T. D. Stanley (2009) conducted a meta-study of 64 minimum-wage studies published between 1972 and 2007 measuring the impact of minimum wages on teenage employment in the United States. When they graphed every employment estimate contained in these studies (over 1,000 in total), weighing each estimate by its statistical precision, they found that the most precise estimates were heavily clustered at or near zero employment effects.

    So, there you have it: A clear picture of the hunt for job-loss effects clumping around zero. That doesn’t mean no one ever loses a job or faces hours’ cutbacks when the minimum wage goes up. But it does mean that the policy has its intended effect of raising the pay of its target population without the unintended consequences relentlessly touted by opponents.

    read the entire article by Michelle A.M. Brown @ MSNBC:

    http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/02/25/minimum-wage-meta-analysis-evidence-over-theory/

  522. Anonymous
    February 26, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    Hey Mr. Holmes, I made a news post just like the way that you do:

    WALMART SUPPORTS SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

    “Walmart ” “announced that it was rolling back” “on” “murder” “after” “the worst slump in Walmart’s history” “on” “ammunition sales”. “The” “Bushmaster AR-15”, “like” “The” “one” “used by” “Adam Lanza” “is” “on sale at” “Walmart” “and” “they are” “readily available” “for” “honor roll students” “for” “ending as many lives as possible

    http://www.thenation.com/article/171808/how-walmart-helped-make-newtown-shooters-ar-15-most-popular-assault-weapon-america#

    Did I do it right? I only used quotes straight from the article, the way you taught me.
    Now go Find Yourself.

  523. February 26, 2013 at 3:48 pm

    I don’t speak for the IHSS workers or the union (CUHW) but I can tell you there is no union contract for IHSS workers in Humboldt. We certainly hope that the county comes to its senses and signs a contract. It is long overdue.

  524. Anonymous
    February 26, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    Hey Bill, I made a news post just like the way that you do:

    WALMART SUPPORTS SCHOOL SHOOTINGS

    “Walmart ” “announced that it was rolling back” “on” “murder” “after” “the worst slump in Walmart’s history” “on” “ammunition sales”. “The” “Bushmaster AR-15”, “like” “The” “one” “used by” “Adam Lanza” “is” “on sale at” “Walmart” “and” “they are” “readily available” “for” “honor roll students” “for” “ending as many lives as possible”.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/171808/how-walmart-helped-make-newtown-shooters-ar-15-most-popular-assault-weapon-america#

    I only used quotes straight from the article, the way you taught us all, and it says wallmart is evil, so I it did good, right?

  525. February 26, 2013 at 3:54 pm

    No ZERO this is how you do it, one short sharp accurate bit of truth:

    Oh and if you are really concerned about job losses maybe we need to get the Walton monopoly under control, doncha think?

    Walmart Alone Cost Us 200,000 Jobs in 6 Years – Lost to China

    “Wal-Mart Moms might not be pleased to learn that according to the Economic Policy Institute, the U.S. trade deficit with China, between 2001 and 2006, eliminated 1.8 million U.S. jobs—and Wal-Mart’s trade deficit with China alone eliminated nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs. Wal-Mart was responsible for 11% of the growth in the U.S. trade deficit during this period.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-norman/pushed-over-the-fiscal-cl_b_2150767.html

  526. Mitch
    February 26, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    I’m delighted that everyone is inviting everyone else to find themselves — we should all introspect from time to time, so bravo all on the excellent caring for one another.

    Looking at the recent comments, I’d have to say that the link from eurekaworker at 3:42 seems to be more legitimate than the Romney-style quotation that immediately followed at 3:47. Meta-analyses are not necessarily smoke and mirrors.

    I’m curious about Mitsubishi A6M’s personal reasons for opposing a higher minimum wage. Would he or she care to elaborate, rather than just provide a clever Google link to pages that include “minimum wage” and “bad”? There are potential arguments on both sides; I’m curious what Mitsubishi A6M believes his or her-self.

  527. Just Watchin
    February 26, 2013 at 4:48 pm

    Mitch :
    I’m delighted that everyone is inviting everyone else to find themselves — we should all introspect from time to time, so bravo all on the excellent caring for one another.
    Looking at the recent comments, I’d have to say that the link from eurekaworker at 3:42 seems to be more legitimate than the Romney-style quotation that immediately followed at 3:47. Meta-analyses are not necessarily smoke and mirrors.
    I’m curious about Mitsubishi A6M’s personal reasons for opposing a higher minimum wage. Would he or she care to elaborate, rather than just provide a clever Google link to pages that include “minimum wage” and “bad”? There are potential arguments on both sides; I’m curious what Mitsubishi A6M believes his or her-self.

    “Romney-style quotation”??. Wow Mitch……you really are obsessed. Give it up already.

  528. Mitch
    February 26, 2013 at 4:50 pm

    JW,

    When I said that I thought that Romney was the most deceitful candidate for President in my lifetime, I meant it. The man’s main qualification was that he looked straight from central casting, but I wouldn’t trust him with a dime.

  529. Just Watchin
    February 26, 2013 at 4:54 pm

    Mitch :
    JW,
    When I said that I thought that Romney was the most deceitful candidate for President in my lifetime, I meant it. The man’s main qualification was that he looked straight from central casting, but I wouldn’t trust him with a dime.

    And I think that Bill Clinton would screw anything with a pulse, but I don’t work that into every post.

  530. February 26, 2013 at 5:27 pm

    40% of Americans Now Make Less Than 1968 Minimum Wage

    http://thecontributor.com/40-americans-now-make-less-1968-minimum-wage

    [Go to the article for some live links and graphs]

    You may have seen charts like the one to the right from the Economic Policy Institute, showing how working people’s wages stopped going up along with productivity gains.

    This means the gains went…somewhere else. See if you can guess who got them? (Hint: it’s the 1 percent; this is one driver of the terrible income and wealth inequality.) This breakoff of wages from productivity growth is partly the result of trade agreements that pit Americans against exploited workers in non-democracies. This weakened the bargaining power of unions, moved factories and industries out of the country, devastated entire regions of our country — and gave the giant multinational corporations, Wall Street and the billionaires the leverage they needed.

    Economist Dean Baker describes one effect of this in Minimum Wage: Who Decided Workers Should Fall Behind?

    “If the minimum wage had risen in step with productivity growth [since 1968], it would be over $16.50 an hour today. That is higher than the hourly wages earned by 40 percent of men and half of women.”

    The minimum wage would be $16.50 an hour — $33,000 a year — if it had kept up with the growth of productivity since 1968. To put the effect of this a different way, 40 percent of Americans now make less than the 1968 minimum wage, had the minimum wage kept pace with productivity gains.

    To put this even another way, the average American’s living standard would be much, much higher today if wages had not decoupled from productivity gains – with the gains all going to the 1 percent instead of being shared by workers. If wages had kept pace we wouldn’t feel the terrible squeeze that everyone in the middle class is feeling.

    This is one more way to understand the effect of income and wealth inequality on each of us. The 1 percent versus 99 percent thing is real. When you hear that the 6 Walmart heirs have more wealth than a third of all Americans combined, it is real. When you hear that the people on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than half of all Americans combined, it is real.

    And the effects on the rest of us are real.

    This seems like a good time to drag out the old post, Nine Pictures Of The Extreme Income/Wealth Gap, which puts pictures on what this kind of wealth means. (This post, by the way, first explained that 400 people have as much wealth as half of all Americans combined. Michael Moore picked that up and talked about it in Madison, Wisconsin, and it rippled out from there.)

    Here is another relevant post: Tax Cuts Are Theft, explaining how cutting taxes on the rich siphons off public wealth.

    And of course this one: Reagan Revolution Home To Roost — In Charts.

  531. Mitch
    February 26, 2013 at 5:50 pm

    One obvious flaw of unregulated capitalism is that all the money, left to its own devices, will eventually end up in the hands of one single “winner,” because having money makes it easier to get money. So every real-world society sets rules that it believes lead to a more just distribution of wealth. The minimum wage is such a rule.

    Whether a citywide minimum wage is a good idea is a question to which I don’t have an answer, but the idea of a nationwide minimum wage is nothing more than an expression of America’s former values — the idea that people who contribute to their neighbors by working full time are entitled to a share of the national wealth sufficient to bring them into the middle-class, and that as the country generates more wealth, it should be used to bring everyone up, not just the top 0.01%.

    It’s sad to see how Americans’ perception of justice has changed in the last forty or fifty years, allowing full time workers to be reduced to poverty while full-time thieves were glorified as “masters of the universe.” That perception may be starting to swing back to historic American values. I hope the swing is real and grows in intensity, but given the disastrous corrosion of the political system that has taken place, it’s not obvious that the swing will change our politics all that much. Funny how Humboldt’s so-called conservatives have “won” just as, in the rest of the country, so-called conservatives are finally being seen for what they really are.

  532. HUUFC
    February 26, 2013 at 7:44 pm

    The bar is higher for a sitting president than the candidate running against him. Obama tells one whopper after another and it’s just politics. Now he’s jetting around the country telling everybody the automatic budget cuts will devastate the United States. He is a liar. He wanted the sequester, he signed it into law. The cuts are in the increase in the federal budget from last year. They are also only about $50 billion because the federal fiscal year ends in seven months, the end of September. What a piece of work obummer is and the complicit liberal media that will not take him to task. We are headed for a big train wreck.

    BTW, Jesse Jackson Jr and his wife are headed to jail. He only stole $750,000, give or take a few dollars.I wonder how much he has hidden for when he gets out. Another top 0.01% just like dear old dad.

  533. Anonymous
    February 26, 2013 at 8:26 pm

    Bill says he’s a ‘libertarian socialist’.
    From Urban Dictionary:
    “libertarian-A person who advocates liberty, especially in regard to thought or conduct.

    socialism-The belief that all property should be held by the state or in common. Since most libertarian socialists are anarchists they believe in property being held in common, meaning anyone can use what ever they want whenever they feel like it.

    Basically, while libertarian capitalists believe all force and coercion is wrong unless used to defend one’s person or property libertarian socialists believe all force and coercion is wrong unless used to defend one’s person, but not one’s property since all property was originally founded on theft and relies on state coercion. Without state coercion capitalists would have to create private organizations (basically, miniature states) to enforce property ‘rights’. Libertarian capitalists ignore the fact that companies would monopolize land and exclude certain companies, eventually leading to vast tracts of private property that function like modern states do.

    see also: anarchism”

    Let’s look at some of the things that Bill & other “libertarian socialists” like to do:
    *Call conservatives white supremacists for not supporting welfare, and then remind those listening that most people on welfare are white (this can also be done in reverse order).
    *Take offense when called “liberal.”
    *Take offense whenever anyone disagrees with his narrow-minded political views
    *Overuse and misapply the word “ignorant.”
    *Overuse and misapply the word “propaganda.”
    *Hate on walmart
    *Contribute absolutely nothing to society whatsoever
    *Complain
    *Hate on walmart
    *Post long-winded rants that turn into flame wars
    *Think he’s some kind of hero to “poor” people by preaching populist views
    *Not work in Humboldt county
    *Make or fan the flames of conspiracy theories
    *Sit in front of the courthouse for weeks “protesting” (while collecting Social Security $$)
    *Vandalize signs while sitting in front of the courthouse for weeks “protesting” (while getting drunk/stoned): http://www.civilizeddisobedience.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/OccupyEureka-know-camping-768×1024.jpg
    *Hate on walmart and any other organization he thinks is a ‘big business’ (including CalTrans)
    *Condemn local businesses for wanting success if it means expanding out of the area
    *Call people fascists, while printing out boatloads/spraying graffiti of their own propaganda
    *Protest the cutting of trees with huge paper signs stapled to a piece of lumber
    *Pass off his ignrance by acting aloof/omniscient when he can’t answer a question
    *Complain, again
    *Call himself a “troubadour” rather than “guitarist” since it sounds more important
    *Use “anonymous” in forums whenever he wants to REALLY flame somebody, so it doesn’t sully his image of being a ‘nice guy’
    *Act like a victim after provoking a reaction
    *Attempt to convince people that they are a victim
    *Get things censored, instead of parodying it
    *Hate on walmart and other ‘big business’ while shopping at them

  534. Mitch
    February 26, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    Anonymous 8:26,

    Rather than give a list of things you don’t like about Bill, perhaps you’d care to offer information on why you disagree with him? If you’ve done that somewhere in the first 500 comments on this thread, never mind.

  535. A Smashing Pumpkins Song
    February 26, 2013 at 9:37 pm

    Mitch :
    I’m curious about Mitsubishi A6M’s personal reasons for opposing a higher minimum wage. Would he or she care to elaborate, rather than just provide a clever Google link to pages that include “minimum wage” and “bad”? There are potential arguments on both sides; I’m curious what Mitsubishi A6M believes his or her-self.

    The name is Z3R0 (One Minus One = Zero, the Mitsubishi A6M is a japanese airplane also called a ‘Zero’, ETC), and I’m a girl (in case it matters, which it doesn’t) who lives and works in Old Town (in case it matters, which it doesn’t). My beliefs have been clear since the outset, but to summarize:
    1) Fair Wage signature gatherers came off as rude and condescending to me (and others) when they were lurking outside my place of business, going as far as saying that I wasn’t an american because I thought differently than him. (Thinking about it, I believe his name was ‘Chive’ or something like that.)
    2) To compensate for the increased wage, businesses near the cutoff number of 25 employees will fire people to get under that number.
    3) Businesses will reduce the hours of their employees to compensate for the increased overhead they’d have.
    4) Businesses will raise prices to compensate for the higher wages they’ll have to pay employees.
    5) The exemption for small businesses will get challenged in court by larger ones (which have more money) on the grounds of having an unfair advantage.
    6) Bill claims to be a nice guy, but belittles peoples’ opinions if they don’t agree with his.
    …Yeah, that’s pretty much everything, I think.

    Oh, and Bill: posts 524/526 weren’t me; I always claim credit for my shenanigans. Kudos to whoever did, though, it was brilliant satire. Anon #535, in contrast, is a little over the top.

  536. A Smashing Pumpkins Song
    February 26, 2013 at 9:45 pm

    BTW, Mitch, I’m not sure if you were being facetious when you remarked about people looking inward, but I’m pretty sure around here it has a slightly more negative connotation and is a substitute for another 4-letter word that starts with F.

  537. Mitch
    February 26, 2013 at 9:57 pm

    Z3R0,

    Thanks for the summary.

    If #1 is true, I can understand why it would turn you off from the proposal, but it really doesn’t have anything to do with the merits of the proposal itself. Same for #6.

    I’ll be interested to hear the replies to #2 through #5. Hopefully they will shed more light than heat.

    And yes, I was being facetious w/r/t introspection, but sometimes feigned obliviousness is a great idea.

  538. February 27, 2013 at 6:16 am

    If “mitsubishi 524” isnt just one of your sock pupput ids how do you explain this quote?

    “Of course the link I posted was full of “con side” opinions — I think raising the minimum wage is a bad idea! Additionally, Bill’s not exactly keen on posting anything beyond opinions and ‘anecdotal evidence’ himself, so why are my links to the opinions I think less valid? ”

    You are not even a good liar.

    As for encountering a rude signature gatherer, well I will apologize to anyone who has had rudeness directed to them by one of our workers for no reason. However if the first words out of your mouth were similar to you first post on this thread:

    “Hey Eureka Fair Wage nutters!
    I’d like a list of businesses that would and wouldn’t be affected by your proposal, since your bearded, schizo-looking street worker couldn’t provide such. Frankly, I expect the latter part of said list to be quite short.
    Thanks a bunch.”

    I have ZERO tolerance for cybertrash cowards, liars, trolls and punks.. Come back here and use your real name like a person with normal amount of courange and we will have a civil debate.

    have a peaceful day
    Bill

  539. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 6:36 am

    Bill….are you really going back to the “use your real name and give me an ip address” whining ?? You have awfully thin skin. I thought you had taken my advice, but apparently not.

  540. February 27, 2013 at 6:45 am

    The name is Z3R0 (One Minus One = Zero, the Mitsubishi A6M is a japanese airplane also called a ‘Zero’, ETC), and I’m a girl (in case it matters, which it doesn’t) who lives and works in Old Town (in case it matters, which it doesn’t). My beliefs have been clear since the outset, but to summarize:

    Yes it matters because you and others claim to be local workers and the claim has been raised that I am not. I am willing to offer proof of that assertion and you are not willing to do so.

    “1) Fair Wage signature gatherers came off as rude and condescending to me (and others) when they were lurking outside my place of business, going as far as saying that I wasn’t an american because I thought differently than him. (Thinking about it, I believe his name was ‘Chive’ or something like that.)”

    Since I gathered about 300 sigs myself I can tell you that being rude and condescending is not a great strategy when gathering sigs, it is counterproductive. I did have one or two confrontations with cranks like ZERO on the street and the exchanges can get heated but they are rare. Raising wages is popular, tea party cranks are not.

    “2) To compensate for the increased wage, businesses near the cutoff number of 25 employees will fire people to get under that number”

    This has been asked and answered serveral times on this blog but I will answer again in the next post.

    “3) Businesses will reduce the hours of their employees to compensate for the increased overhead they’d have.”

    This has been proved wrong several times including the recent link http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/02/25/minimum-wage-meta-analysis-evidence-over-theory/

    so you are spreading lies. Now you may believe them to be true, I understand, and you may be unknowingly spreading them because of ignorance, but they arre lies nevertheless.

    “4) Businesses will raise prices to compensate for the higher wages they’ll have to pay employees”

    Have you noticed that “prices” have already “gone up?” That is why workers (including you) need a raise.

    5) The exemption for small businesses will get challenged in court by larger ones (which have more money) on the grounds of having an unfair advantage.

    We have established conclusively in this thread that small business exemotions have never been challenged successbully in court.

    6) Bill claims to be a nice guy, but belittles peoples’ opinions if they don’t agree with his.

    Well I have been posting at the Herald since 2007 with hundreds of posts. You will be hard pressed to find a single instance where I have been overthetop rude to an actual person here. Your opinions are so ill informed, ignorant, and presented in such an offensive manner that you deserve ridicule like any other cyber coward.

    …Yeah, that’s pretty much everything, I think.

    Oh, and Bill: posts 524/526 weren’t me; I always claim credit for my shenanigans. Kudos to whoever did, though, it was brilliant satire. Anon #535, in contrast, is a little over the top.

    exceot when you don’t Like in 524. Lets face it you have already used a half dozen sock puppets here. You “take credit” by inventing a new ID.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  541. February 27, 2013 at 6:52 am

    We are told by people who want to keep wages low that raising the minimum wage will cause employers to lay off workers. We are told that a business that employs 100 workers @ $8 an hour has a wage expense of $800 an hour, and if those workers are paid $10.00 an hour then the company can only employ 80 workers for that hour.

    Well think about it. What is wrong with this picture? Well it leaves out company profits. The above scenario assumes of course that company profits are sacred and must be untouched. We have seen both the minimum wage and the average wages for American workers decline over the last 40 years. If the above scenario were true, there should have been an increase in employment rates because workers are cheaper! But instead we have the highest corporate profits in history and the highest unemployment in 75 years!

    That is because the increases in worker productivity over the last decades have been captured into corporate profits and have not been shared with workers. This is truly “redistribution of wealth” – from the working poor and middle class into the pockets of the rich corporate elite.

    The cost of labor is just one of the costs of production. Suppose that the company is making widgets, and each widget requires the company to purchase one thingamajig as a component to make the widget, and the thingamajigs cost $8.00 each. Suppose the thingamajig supplier announces a $2.00 price increase. Will the company then make only 80 widgets instead of 100? Of course not, because their profits would suffer. They will still have to buy 100 thingamajigs and spend the extra money. The same is true with employees. The company above is employing 100 employees because they need 100 employees to produce what they are producing. If you think that the company is employing 20 extra employees out of kindness you are mistaken. If they cut back on employees they will be cutting back on profits.

    Large companies and corporations have been so profitable for the last few years because they have been able to raise the prices for the goods they sell and they have been able to drive wages down. They can’t have it both ways.

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/think-about-it/

  542. February 27, 2013 at 6:56 am

    We understand that the number 25 is an arbitrary number. So is the tradtional age of majority at 21 in our society. It is an arbitrary number. Some people are clearly ready for adulthood at 17. Some clearly aren’t ready for adulthood even at 25. But we use the arbitrary number of 21 for all. While we don’t want to take the analogy too far because we don’t believe in corporate personhood, we consider the number of 25 employees to be the number of majority for businesses. Under 25 employees, and you are a young growing business that needs flexibility. 25 employees or more and you are an adult business, with adult responsibilities in the economy, including paying a decent wage to your employees.

  543. February 27, 2013 at 7:04 am

    This was asked and anwered on Nov. 27.
    Thorstein veblen:
    November 27, 2012 at 4:40 pm | #114

    Quote

    I’d sure hate to be my employers 25th employee. Seems like this would work better if applied more broadly, to all employees and countywide. Our geographic isolation would probably make a measure like this more effective.

    eurekaworker
    November 27, 2012 at 5:06 pm | #115

    Quote

    Thorstein, we do anticipate what we call compression right around that inflection point of 25.

    For instance, a company with 25 employees, but 10 of them part time, may choose to convert 2 part time jobs into one full time job. Naturally this will discomfort a few part time workers in this town (there aren’t that many businesses around 25 employees, there are clusters at 19 and 49 probably due to tax incentive constrictions) but that will be balanced by having more full time jobs in the community. The gross amount of employment will not change.

    As far as applying it more broadly, we agree that all workers should make a living wage but if you read the “Tiered Minimum Wage” post it explains why we are exempting Mom and Pop businesses. Politically the tiered minimum wage is much more popular and has far less opposition than a flat minimum wage. It is a historic compromise between regulation and deregulation. In this case, the large businesses are regulated, while the Mom and Pops are deregulated.

    We understand that the number 25 is an arbitrary number. So is the tradtional age of majority at 21 in our society. It is an arbitrary number. Some people are clearly ready for adulthood at 17. Some clearly aren’t ready for adulthood even at 25. But we use the arbitrary number of 21 for all. While we don’t want to take the analogy too far because we don’t believe in corporate personhood, we consider the number of 25 employees to be the number of majority for businesses. Under 25 employees, and you are a young growing business that needs flexibility. 25 employees or more and you are an adult business, with adult responsibilities in the economy, including paying a decent wage to your employees.

  544. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 7:12 am

    So, stripped of insults (whether justified or not), here are Z3R0’s stated concerns with the proposal and the replies to Z3R0 from highboldtage/eurekaworker. I’m not offering my own opinions here, just trying to summarize those from highboldtage/eurekaworker. Readers can form their own opinions of whether the questions have been well-addressed by these responses.

    2) To compensate for the increased wage, businesses near the cutoff number of 25 employees will fire people to get under that number

    The post at 6:52 says, basically, companies hire the number of employees they need to maximize their profits. If wages go up, a business will eat the additional cost, because it needs the number of employees it now employs.
    Also covered in the post at 7:04 AM today.

    3) Businesses will reduce the hours of their employees to compensate for the increased overhead they’d have.

    This has been proved wrong several times including the recent link http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/02/25/minimum-wage-meta-analysis-evidence-over-theory/

    4) Businesses will raise prices to compensate for the higher wages they’ll have to pay employees

    Have you noticed that “prices” have already “gone up?” That is why workers (including you) need a raise.

    5) The exemption for small businesses will get challenged in court by larger ones (which have more money) on the grounds of having an unfair advantage.

    We have established conclusively in this thread that small business exemptions have never been challenged success[f]ully in court.

  545. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 7:41 am

    I’m going to remove the off-topic and childish posts here for a while, with faith that they’ll be replaced by civil discussion.

    That includes posts containing commentary about insults as well as posts containing insults.

    It may take a few hours from the time a post appears to the time it is deleted. Repeated deletions will cause the commenter to be flagged as spam.

  546. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 8:44 am

    You or Bill saying something is so does not make it so Mitch.

    If business costs go up they will be forced to compensate somehow unless the business is wealthy and doing well, which few are in Eureka. So what do they do? They must either cut costs, raise prices (or a combination of both) or shut their doors.

    The biggest expense most businesses have is payroll. That has to be the number one target when cutting costs. More automation maybe, fewer hours ? Raising prices will be a certainty in the restaurant and fast food industry. Others will shut their doors. I did not see anything in the topic heading that made a distinction between part time or full time employees. Many restaurants have more than 25 employees with most of them working less than 30 hours a week.

    Businesses that can move out of Eureka will. Businesses that are thinking of starting up or moving here will think long & hard about coming here where an anti business attitude has taken over.

    Another point too is this will pretty much kill employment for teenagers. At $12 an hour a business will not put up with hiring kids who have no experience and need to learn the basics of the work ethic.

    Lastly there is a 100% certainty this will be challenged in the courts by one or more of the big employers. The courts will throw it out entirely or force it to apply to all businesses. There is no doubt.

    Those that say there will be a huge boost in local dollars are making the mistake of thinking the business world is static and will not adjust to a sudden increase in costs.

  547. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 8:51 am

    Business owner,

    Please note the following from my comment at 7:12 this morning:

    I’m not offering my own opinions here, just trying to summarize those from highboldtage/eurekaworker. Readers can form their own opinions of whether the questions have been well-addressed by these responses.

    Your comment at 8:44 is a good example of someone laying out their arguments. Thank you.

    I note that your next-to-last paragraph of “100% certainty” is not supported by anything you say, or even by your reputation, since you go only by the pseudonym “Business owner.” Bill has stated the opposite. I invite you both to present your evidence regarding the legality of the 25 employee threshold.

  548. February 27, 2013 at 8:56 am

    “Businesses that can move out of Eureka will. Businesses that are thinking of starting up or moving here will think long & hard about coming here where an anti business attitude has taken over.”

    Please name one (1) business that will move out of Eureka if they are mandated to pay a decent wage to their employees. If you can do that we can have a debate.

    We are not “anti-business” our initiative will be a boost to true local mom & pops, as they are starting to realize.

    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  549. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 9:16 am

    Business owner…….the Act requires that anyone working more than two hours a week counts towards the 25 employee threshold.

  550. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 10:11 am

    This excerpt is from “Living Wage NYC” Jan. 27, 2012 publication, speaking about the Santa Fe ordinance:

    “The requirement known as the Living Wage Ordinance went into effect in 2003, at that time requiring an hourly minimum wage of $8.50 for all businesses with 25 or more employees. The rate was to have increased to $10.50 an hour by 2008.

    But in 2007, the city reached a compromise with business groups. The arrangement required all businesses to follow the ordinance, but linked the rate increase to a consumer price index. For 2012, that rate is $10.29”.

    Large businesses were challenging the law, and sought a level playing field with regards to wages paid. Small businesses wound up paying the same wages as large businesses, such as Walmart. The original threshold for paying the higher wage was 25 or more employees. Sound familiar??

  551. February 27, 2013 at 10:16 am

    This was already asked by Just Watchin and anwered long ago in #274 but here you go.

    “Santa Fe is the third city in the country to adopt a minimum wage law. (Living wage laws enacted in other cities apply only to city employees, city contractors, and companies receiving city grants and subsidies). In 2002, New Orleans adopted a minimum wage of $6.15 per hour, but the law was struck down by the state Supreme Court, which ruled that state law preempted the authority of cities to set wage levels. Santa Monica, California, also enacted a minimum wage of $12.25 per hour ($10.50 with health benefits) for businesses in its coastal tourism zone. The Santa Monica ordinance was subsequently withdrawn in a referendum vote that narrowly defeated it in November 2002.

    In June 2004, Santa Fe’s minimum wage law was upheld by a state court. It was challenged on the grounds that cities cannot interfere with the employee-employer relationship, but the judge ruled that regulating such civil relationships was a power granted to cities by state law. He also said that the ordinance did not represent an illegal “taking” of private property by government, and that applying it only to businesses with more than 25 employees was rational and did not violate the equal protection clause.

    An appeal of the judicial opinion was filed and a request to stay the living wage law until after the appeals process was also requested. On July 19, 2004, Judge Daniel Sanchez rejected the request of the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce and other business plaintiffs to stay the living wage until after their appeal – a process that could take more than a year. The Chamber argued that they would win on appeal and that some individual businesses would be forced out of business. The Judge rejected their arguments and left the law in effect.”

    http://www.ilsr.org/rule/living-wage/2090-2/

  552. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 10:37 am

    highboldtage :This was already asked by Just Watchin and anwered long ago in #274 but here you go.
    “Santa Fe is the third city in the country to adopt a minimum wage law. (Living wage laws enacted in other cities apply only to city employees, city contractors, and companies receiving city grants and subsidies). In 2002, New Orleans adopted a minimum wage of $6.15 per hour, but the law was struck down by the state Supreme Court, which ruled that state law preempted the authority of cities to set wage levels. Santa Monica, California, also enacted a minimum wage of $12.25 per hour ($10.50 with health benefits) for businesses in its coastal tourism zone. The Santa Monica ordinance was subsequently withdrawn in a referendum vote that narrowly defeated it in November 2002.
    In June 2004, Santa Fe’s minimum wage law was upheld by a state court. It was challenged on the grounds that cities cannot interfere with the employee-employer relationship, but the judge ruled that regulating such civil relationships was a power granted to cities by state law. He also said that the ordinance did not represent an illegal “taking” of private property by government, and that applying it only to businesses with more than 25 employees was rational and did not violate the equal protection clause.
    An appeal of the judicial opinion was filed and a request to stay the living wage law until after the appeals process was also requested. On July 19, 2004, Judge Daniel Sanchez rejected the request of the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce and other business plaintiffs to stay the living wage until after their appeal – a process that could take more than a year. The Chamber argued that they would win on appeal and that some individual businesses would be forced out of business. The Judge rejected their arguments and left the law in effect.”
    http://www.ilsr.org/rule/living-wage/2090-2/

    Bill….the link you provide is dated Nov. 21, 2008, and re-states the 25 employee threshold. Yet, on Nov. 28,2007, the Santa Fe ordinance was amended to include ALL businesses. Which one is telling the truth??

  553. February 27, 2013 at 10:46 am

    The Santa Fe ordinance was amended by the city council it was not successfully challenged in court. That is the point.

    We obviously can’t control the future actiions of the city council Yes they could apply a similar ordinance to everyone sometime in the future, but as I pointed out way back in the 270s, that has nothing to do with the Eureka Fair Wage Act. The city council can do this anytime they like, with or without the Eureka Fair Wage Act. To suggest otherwise is just fear mongering.

    You have to ask yourself, what is the chance that the Eureka City Council would pass the Fair Wage Act today. Then ask yourself what the odds are thay they would extend it even to businesses with less than 25 employees.

    My predictiion: It ain’t gonna happen.

  554. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 10:50 am

    I do not say Bill, that cities cannot invoke a minimum wage. I am saying they cannot discriminate against one type of business giving other businesses an advantage.

    I am not a lawyer (and neither are you) but you don’t have to be one to understand that a city government cannot discriminate in that way.

  555. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 10:52 am

    highboldtage :The Santa Fe ordinance was amended by the city council it was not successfully challenged in court. That is the point.
    We obviously can’t control the future actiions of the city council Yes they could apply a similar ordinance to everyone sometime in the future, but as I pointed out way back in the 270s, that has nothing to do with the Eureka Fair Wage Act. The city council can do this anytime they like, with or without the Eureka Fair Wage Act. To suggest otherwise is just fear mongering.
    You have to ask yourself, what is the chance that the Eureka City Council would pass the Fair Wage Act today. Then ask yourself what the odds are thay they would extend it even to businesses with less than 25 employees.
    My predictiion: It ain’t gonna happen.

    No Bill…..the point is that you post a link the you KNOW contains inaccurate information that reinforces the message you want to get out. I believe that there is a word for that, but it escapes me at the moment…..

  556. February 27, 2013 at 11:01 am

    I have three words for those of you who think government can’t discriminate against businesses based on size. Small Business Admininstration.

    Governments can discriminate against businesses by size if it suits a rational purpose.

  557. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 11:08 am

    The New Mexico court of appeals discusses the “equal protection” challenge to Santa Fe’s 25 employee threshold in this ruling, paragraphs 46 to 51: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html

    Their conclusion:

    The city council’s ultimate selection of the twenty-five employee cutoff is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose and Plaintiffs have not shown how it is invidious, arbitrary, or irrational.   We therefore conclude the ordinance does not offend equal protection guarantees provided by the New Mexico Constitution. – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html#sthash.h6XeCZRx.dpuf

    I am unaware of any more recent ruling, but would welcome anyone who cares to provide one.

  558. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 11:09 am

    Bottom line…. small businesses will be the “swing demographic” in the vote, and right now they are being led to believe that they will have a competitive advantage if the Act passes. They deserve to know the truth.

  559. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 11:17 am

    JW,

    You are certainly welcome to that interpretation and may even be correct that small business will be a “swing demographic.” But there are rational arguments for exempting small businesses, as is evident in paragraph 50 of the New Mexico Court of Appeals ruling:

    In its recommendations, the management minority of the Roundtable suggested that if the city council did expand the wage requirement to private employers, the ordinance should differentiate among businesses by limiting the ordinance to “employers with gross receipts of $5 million or more per year,” stating that “[s]maller businesses simply have a limited capacity to leverage large expense increases.” [emphasis added] – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html#sthash.c51pYTuX.dpuf

  560. February 27, 2013 at 11:35 am

    There is a wealth of information at this link below. Its a scientific study.

    “Finally, we turn to the results by establishment size. In Santa Fe, the law exempted establishments with fewer than 25 employees.17 Not surprisingly, then, the increase did not appear to have much impact on the wages paid in establishments below the size cutoff. In the first year after the increase, wages in the smallest two establishment sizes we examined (0-9 and 10-24 employees) barely changed relative to the three geographic control groups, with changes ranging from -1 to 2 percent, with none statistically significant (see panel (a) of Table 8B). In the second year after the increase, relative wages changes of 1 to 4 percent, though only one of these cases was marginally significant.

    In the third year, wages increased by statistically significant or marginally significant levels of 3 to 7 percent in two of six cases, with statistically insignificant increases of 1 to 4 percent in the remaining cases. While the law exempted

    these smaller establishments, the small relative wage increases could reflect changes in the Santa Fe labor market induced by the minimum-wage law. The city minimum wage, which raised the floor of the low-wage labor market well above the federal minimum wage, may have set a reference wage that affected pay even in exempted establishments. These kinds ofspillover dynamics, however, would not be consistent with the standard competitive model of the low-wage labor market.

    Among covered small establishments – those with 25 to 100 employees before the law went into effect – wages increased by a statistically significant three to eight percent in six of nine cases (and by two to five percent in the three other cases where the changes were not statistically significant). Employment, however, did not change by a statistically significant amount in any of the six cases where wages rose. In five of the six cases, employment increased; in the remaining case, employment fell. The corresponding policy elasticities ranged from -0.2 to 0.3.

    17 The small-establishment exemption was initially intended to be permanent. At the end of 2007, the city council voted to remove the exemption for smaller establishments in 2008. During the full period analyzed here, establishments with fewer than 25 workers were exempt from the Santa Fe minimum wage.

    18 If anything, in a competitive model, the minimum wage should lower average wages in exempt establishments because employees who lost positions in larger, covered establishments would increase the labor supply available to
    smaller, uncovered establishments, driving down the wage they have to pay to attract workers. One artefact of the way the test is constructed may also explain the wage increase. Establishment size is determined by the establishment’s average number of employees in the year before the minimum wage went into effect. Establishments
    that were initially below the 25-employee cutoff but that subsequently grew would be covered by the law after the increase, potentially increasing their average wage.”

    http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage-2011-03.pdf

  561. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 11:40 am

    Mitch….. when the city of Santa Fe reached it’s comprimise with the chamber of commerce, the minimum wage was scheduled to increase one month later, Jan. 2008, to $10.50 / hour, which is more than it is today. With a generous wage increase and 25 employee threshold “in the bank”,why would the city compromise? Because, as the city’s attorney said he believed it had only a 50/50 chance to survive a legal challenge. Who do you think has the deeper pockets to fight a protracted legal battle, Eureka or Walmart?

  562. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    Well, here’s what the facts looks like to me. In 2003, Santa Fe passed a minimum wage increase that applied only to larger businesses. The city’s action survived a court challenge up to the New Mexico Court of Appeals. Then, in 2007 or 2008, Santa Fe chose to expand the higher local minimum wage to all businesses.

    Why the City of Santa Fe made the decision, five years after raising its minimum wage only on larger businesses, to expand its higher minimum wage to apply to all businesses, I don’t know.

    But the facts as I understand them are that (1) the City of Santa Fe created a locally higher minimum wage in 2003; (2) the City of Santa Fe continues to have a locally higher minimum wage today; (3) that higher minimum wage was applied to all businesses in Santa Fe in 2007 or 2008; and (4) Santa Fe’s December 2012 unemployment rate is well below the New Mexico and federal unemployment rates (5.1%, 6.4%, 7.8%).

    There are plenty of other things to argue about in connection with the local proposal, but those are facts related to Santa Fe’s minimum wage ordinance.

  563. February 27, 2013 at 12:05 pm

    Its time to put this non controversy to rest. The removal of the Santa Fe 25 employee exemption was the result of a compromise reached between the Santa Fe Chamber/business interests and the living wage campaign there. Here is the story from Santa Fe

    Applause greets wage law changes

    Council vote broadens scope of $9.50-an-hour pay to nearly all workers

    Julie Ann Grimm | The New Mexican
    Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2007

    “Almost all workers in Santa Fe will be paid a minimum wage of $9.50 per hour beginning in January, and they can expect pay increases based on the cost of living in future years, following Wednesday night’s unanimous City Council vote to broaden its rules on the so-called “living wage.”

    The rules formerly required employers with 25 or more workers to pay the minimum wage, but the newly adopted amendments apply the highest minimum wage in the nation to employees of all businesses that require city business licenses starting in 2008.

    The other major change to the ordinance ties future wage increases to inflation as calculated by the consumer price index. Beginning Jan. 1, 2009, and each year thereafter, the wage will be adjusted upward with council approval by an amount corresponding to the previous year’s index increase, if any.

    The index is a measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for goods and services, according to the U.S. Department of Labor, which produces the data.
    More than 70 people testified at Wednesday’s hearing in favor of the amendments, with many urging councilors to ensure there will be no exceptions to the rules. Several speakers alluded to rumors that councilors planned to keep teenagers or high-school dropouts from earning the wage.

    “No student is going to drop out for $9.50 an hour,” said Cian Williams, a senior at Santa Fe High School. “An exemption of any kind condemns a citizen to the servitude of poverty.”

    While no city councilors asked for such an exception, Councilor Rebecca Wurzburger amended the rules to call for a study of whether the minimum wage contributes to an increase in the student dropout rate. The study also would address how the rules impact businesses with 10 or fewer employees.

    Real-estate agent Dia Winograd said she favors the “living wage” because she can attest to a great disparity in resources, income and lifestyle in the community. “When we have people who live in huge homes only half the year, the least we can do is pay a living wage to those on the other end of the spectrum,” she said.

    Joe Cieszinski, who has run a religious bookstore in Santa Fe for about 20 years, was the lone voice at the hearing opposed to the changes. He said the new wage rules would reduce his income of $16,000 a year by about $10,000.

    “Some of us will be damaged perhaps to the extent of going out of business,” Cieszinski said. “It will be very hard for me and others to stay in existence if this passes. A job at $7 or $8.50 an hour is better than no job at $9.50 an hour.”

    A recent study by The University of New Mexico Bureau of Business and Economic Research found the city’s economy was performing well and the wage increases had not had significant impact.

    Based on the Living Wage Ordinance first adopted in 2002, the minimum wage went from $8.50 an hour to $9.50 an hour at the beginning of this year and would have moved to $10.50 in January had the council not amended the rules.

    The amendments represented a compromise with members of the business community who said the additional dollar increase would be arbitrary. While the current amendments had little opposition, the early passage of the rules was rife with infighting from the hotel and restaurant industries and other business leaders who took the city to court over the ordinance.

    They lost the challenge in the state Court of Appeals, however, and began working with the mayor and the nonprofit Living Wage Network on a solution. Many who had been among the early opposition appeared at a press conference this summer touting the compromise and offering their support.

    “The vibe in this room is a lot different than we have had in the past,” said Councilor Matthew Ortiz, who along with other councilors thanked those no longer on the governing body who made the original ordinance happen.

    Mayor David Coss said Wednesday’s vote — which was greeted with a standing ovation, whistles and cheers from the audience — was the final chapter in a yearslong community struggle.

    “In 100 years, historians and philosophers and poets are going to read the minutes from the living wage hearings and get a lot out of it,” he said.

    One group of laborers remains outside the wage rules, however. People who are working as interns for college credit are not entitled to the minimum wage under the ordinance. Councilor Patti Bushee tried to remove that exemption, but her motion died for lack of a second. She also said she would like to see Santa Fe County enact the same minimum wage as the city.”

    http://www.santafenewmexican.com/Local%20News/Applause_greets_wage_law_changes

  564. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 12:57 pm

    If it passes here it will only be a matter of time before all businesses large and small have the $12 per hour minimum wage. That compromise was only made due to the eventual court decision they knew would come. There is no intelligent way to argue that it doesn’t violate the equal protection clause.

    The fact that Bill is fighting that inescapable logic, and the reason he supports the small business exclusion, can only be he acknowledges the impact would be catastrophic on small businesses.

    That acknowledgement means he knows the impact would be detrimental to large businesses.

    All else is smoke.

  565. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 1:09 pm

    “There is no intelligent way to argue that it doesn’t violate the equal protection clause.”

    I’m surprised, Business owner, that you feel comfortable saying this after I spent some time tracking down the opinion of the New Mexico Court of Appeals and posting the relevant quote a few comments back. While you are welcome to disagree with the New Mexico Court of Appeals, they say that the 25 employee cutoff does not violate equal protection. Sure, they are not a California court, but it seems you are completely ignoring the fact of this court decision, which directly contradicts your statement above.

    I’ll repeat it here:

    The city council’s ultimate selection of the twenty-five employee cutoff is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose and Plaintiffs have not shown how it is invidious, arbitrary, or irrational.   We therefore conclude the ordinance does not offend equal protection guarantees provided by the New Mexico Constitution. – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html#sthash.h6XeCZRx.dpuf

  566. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 1:40 pm

    Mitch :
    “There is no intelligent way to argue that it doesn’t violate the equal protection clause.”
    I’m surprised, Business owner, that you feel comfortable saying this after I spent some time tracking down the opinion of the New Mexico Court of Appeals and posting the relevant quote a few comments back. While you are welcome to disagree with the New Mexico Court of Appeals, they say that the 25 employee cutoff does not violate equal protection. Sure, they are not a California court, but it seems you are completely ignoring the fact of this court decision, which directly contradicts your statement above.
    I’ll repeat it here:

    The city council’s ultimate selection of the twenty-five employee cutoff is rationally related to a legitimate government purpose and Plaintiffs have not shown how it is invidious, arbitrary, or irrational.   We therefore conclude the ordinance does not offend equal protection guarantees provided by the New Mexico Constitution. – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html#sthash.h6XeCZRx.dpuf

    If they were on such firm legal ground, why did they eliminate the 25 employee threshold?? Or wait…..maybe that was the plan all along. Get small business owners to vote for the minimum wage increase, then turn the tables and screw them. This is starting to make sense now. Eureka small business owners……BEWARE!!

  567. That Other Anonymous
    February 27, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    Or maybe the Santa Fe city council took a look at how the minimum wage increase had worked out for large employers, and concluded that all the dire, scaremongering predictions of gloom and doom and fleeing employers and economic meltdown simply hadn’t happened, and as a result of that, they decided that the overall effect on businesses in general, both large and small, of raising the minimum wage, was a net-positive. And it looks like, indeed, it was

    And yes, in a few years the City Council here in Eureka could, if they wanted to, decide the same thing. Or not. Or they could raise the minimum wage somewhat for small businesses, but still not to the same rate as the larger businesses. Which are all things that they’re free to do whether or not the current initiative passes.

    It kinda sounds like what the critics are afraid of is that the current initiative will pass, and will work out just fine for both employers and employees (gasp!), at which point even more people might see for themselves how workers being paid better (shudder!) actually benefits the whole community (oh the horror!)

  568. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    Z3R0,

    Please see my comment of 7:41 AM today, which explains why I’m not pulling your most recent comment out of moderation. Feel free to argue for or against the proposition.

  569. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    Other than to give small businesses an advantage, what possible reason could there be for the under 25 employee exception?

  570. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 2:19 pm

    And please, Bill & Mitch could you both answer?

    (I can hardly wait for this one!)

  571. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    Business owner,

    There are rational arguments for exempting small businesses, as is evident in paragraph 50 of the New Mexico Court of Appeals ruling:

    In its recommendations, the management minority of the Roundtable suggested that if the city council did expand the wage requirement to private employers, the ordinance should differentiate among businesses by limiting the ordinance to “employers with gross receipts of $5 million or more per year,” stating that “[s]maller businesses simply have a limited capacity to leverage large expense increases.” [emphasis added] – See more at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html#sthash.c51pYTuX.dpuf

    If you are serious about discussing the issue, perhaps it would be worth reading the ruling, which is at: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nm-court-of-appeals/1380715.html . It includes the information gathered by the courts on the issue in Santa Fe, and may provide facts each side might wish to use.

  572. February 27, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    I have already answered this way back on 24.

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2012/11/26/eureka-fair-wage-act-what-do-people-think/#comment-185648

    This has been on our website since last fall.

    This is the theory behind the two tier minimum wage.

  573. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 2:59 pm

    Here’s a comment that I’m sure will be REALLY well received, but consider this: what if failure of this act winds up costing minimum wage earners? By that I mean, there is already acceptance of a $10 / $10.50 per hour range in California. To most workers (voters), a 50% increase from $8 to $12,to be honest, smacks of greed. When was the last time anyone got a 50% raise? If the Act goes down, and exit polling indicates that an increase to $ 10 / hour would have passed, did you just cost minimum wage earners $4000 a year?

  574. That Other Anonymous
    February 27, 2013 at 3:00 pm

    “Other than to give small businesses an advantage, what possible reason could there be for the under 25 employee exception?”

    Why would there need to be any other reason? Giving small businesses a few advantages is something most people happily agree with, because large businesses already enjoy lots of advantages, and because fostering a vibrant local small business sector is a good thing (1) because small businesses can be an important engine of entrepreneurship, (2) because small businesses are usually local businesses, and their revenues and profits get re-circulated through the community at a higher rate than larger, corporate, and out-of-area-owned businesses, and (3) because many businesses start as small businesses, and then if successful, grow to become medium-sized or large businesses.

  575. That Other Anonymous
    February 27, 2013 at 3:06 pm

    “To most workers (voters), a 50% increase from $8 to $12,to be honest, smacks of greed.”

    I very much doubt that. I guess we’ll see.

  576. February 27, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    Court Backs Santa Fe Living Wage

    By Martin Salazar and Mark Oswald
    Journal Northern Bureau Wednesday, November 30, 2005

    SANTA FE— Opponents of Santa Fe’s controversial living wage law suffered a blow on Tuesday when the state Court of Appeals rejected their challenge to the city ordinance requiring larger employers in the City Different to pay workers $8.50 an hour.
    “The city has the power to set a minimum wage for private employers that is higher than that mandated by the state,” the appeals court said in its opinion. “The ordinance does not conflict with state law and is not otherwise unconstitutional.”
    The decision was heralded as a big victory by proponents of the so-called living wage.
    “We are absolutely thrilled about it,” said Carol Oppenheimer, a member of the Living Wage Network. “It is a tremendous win for Santa Fe, for everyone who made sure that the law was passed and that it was upheld in the courts.”
    It was unclear Tuesday whether opponents of the ordinance will ask the state Supreme Court to review the case or mount a new challenge to the law in federal court.
    Santa Fe attorney T. Glenn Ellington— who represented the New Mexicans for Free Enterprise, the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce and several businesses in challenging the wage law— said he had yet to discuss the issue with his clients.
    “We’ll have to read the decision and have time to think about it,” Ellington said.
    The Santa Fe City Council adopted the wage ordinance in February 2003. The law, requiring Santa Fe businesses with 25 employees or more to pay workers $8.50 per hour, went into effect on July 1, 2004. The state and federal minimum hourly wage is $5.15.
    With Santa Fe’s cost of living estimated at around 18 percent above the national average, the ordinance was intended to bring some financial relief to low-income workers in the City Different, proponents said.
    Opponents have argued that the law has driven businesses to close and that more will follow as the law phases in higher local minimum wage rates in the future. Barring action from the City Council, the living wage will go up to $9.50-an-hour in January and would go to $10.50 an hour in 2008.
    The appeals court heard oral arguments in the case in late June. Among the plaintiffs’ arguments were that the city overstepped its authority by enacting the ordinance, that the state minimum wage law preempts local policy-making in this area, that the ordinance amounted to taking of private property and that the ordinance’s exemption for small businesses violates constitutional equal protection guarantees.
    The 42-page opinion upholding an earlier district court decision supporting the living wage law flatly rejects each of the legal challenges mounted by the plaintiffs, systematically explaining why they don’t hold up. The opinion was authored by Judge Cynthia A. Fry and joined by Chief Judge Michael D. Bustamante and Judge Lynn Pickard.
    “We’re disappointed,” said Ellington. “Of course we’ve always contended that it’s really a statewide issue … and that the state should make this kind of decision (on minimum wages).”
    Ellington noted that Gov. Bill Richardson and House Speaker Ben Lujan, D-Santa Fe, have suggested that the Legislature consider raising the state minimum wage— now $5.15 an hour— at next year’s legislative session.
    He said “there will be a lot of issues above and beyond the dollar amount,” including whether Santa Fe’s wage ordinance should be pre-empted by a state standard.
    Most of Santa Fe’s business community would have agreed to a higher minimum wage two years ago, just not the rates the City Council approved, Ellington said.
    He said some plaintiffs may want to see if the City Council approves a proposal to delay the scheduled increase in the living wage rate to $9.50 in January before deciding how to proceed. The council will take up the proposal at a Dec. 14 meeting.
    City Councilor David Pfeffer, who opposed the living wage law, said the appeals court ruling makes the council’s consideration of whether to postpone the increase to $9.50 “all the more important.”
    “Good intentions don’t necessarily translate into good law,” Pfeffer said.
    Restaurant operator Robbie Day, who testified against the ordinance in court, said the plaintiffs and “a large part of the business community don’t believe this (the wage law) is the progressive way to deal with the cost of living.”
    He said doubling the minimum wage is “a pretty significant surcharge” for business owners providing opportunity for entry-level workers to learn job and language skills.
    But Day said the legal fight may not be over. He said he expects a new challenge to the living wage ordinance to be filed in federal court. A previous federal court challenge filed by Coca-Cola was dropped.
    Proponents of the living wage praised the decision.
    City Councilor David Coss said he was “very pleased that the Court of Appeals agreed with District Judge Daniel Sanchez, who ruled for the ordinance last year, and the city of Santa Fe.
    “I think we have a very good ordinance, and it’s working well for Santa Fe. I’m pleased and proud that it withstood this test.”
    Coss, who has announced he will run for mayor next year, said he wasn’t surprised that the ordinance was upheld. He noted that there are other living wage laws around the country— although Santa Fe’s is among only a handful that extend broadly into the private sector.
    “We just have the best one right now,” he said.
    Journal staff writer Emily Crawford contributed to this report.

    http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/412055nm11-30-05.htm

  577. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 3:46 pm

    Posting articles from 2005, when you know the ordinance was amended in 2007. Just plain deceitful.

  578. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 4:03 pm

    I don’t consider eurekaworker’s post at 3:33 to be deceitful in the slightest. The fact that the ordinance was amended in 2007 does not change anything about this report of a court victory in 2005. And several comments just today — including one less than four hours ago from eurekaworker — have discussed how the ordinance was later amended.

    I’ve deleted a comment from eurekaworker just now. The acceptable-on-this-thread part of eurekaworker’s comment reads as follows:

    I already posted an article from 2007 detailing the city council decison in 2007 its at #566.

    This article from 2005 explains the unsuccessful attempt to challenge it in court. Earilier arguments hightlight the lower court decision, this post outlines the Appellate court decision.

    Don’t you think that people here are smart enough to scroll back up a few posts? Don’t you understand that I include the dates on these stories?

  579. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 4:17 pm

    Interesting that there have been no comments on my post at #577. I thought that would create a stir, unless common sense dictates that it is a possibility

  580. February 27, 2013 at 4:20 pm

    Just Watchin :
    Here’s When was the last time anyone got a 50% raise?

    2003 in Santa Fe. What happened? In 2013 Santa Fe has the best economy of any of the metropolitan areas in New Mexico.

  581. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 4:24 pm

    I’m actually pulling for the Fair Wage Act. I curious to see what Walmart does when they own an entire city!!

  582. February 27, 2013 at 4:41 pm

    We already know what walmart does when they own a country. Take a look at Mexico (bribery) and Bangladesh (corrupt to the point of murdering workers.)

  583. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 4:44 pm

    Just Watchin :
    Here’s a comment that I’m sure will be REALLY well received, but consider this: what if failure of this act winds up costing minimum wage earners? By that I mean, there is already acceptance of a $10 / $10.50 per hour range in California. To most workers (voters), a 50% increase from $8 to $12,to be honest, smacks of greed. When was the last time anyone got a 50% raise? If the Act goes down, and exit polling indicates that an increase to $ 10 / hour would have passed, did you just cost minimum wage earners $4000 a year?

    No opinion here Bill?? How about you Mitch??

  584. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 5:07 pm

    highboldtage :
    We already know what walmart does when they own a country. Take a look at Mexico (bribery) and Bangladesh (corrupt to the point of murdering workers.)

    Because Mexico never had bribery and Bangladesh never had corruption until a few years ago when WalMart arrived?

  585. Business owner
    February 27, 2013 at 5:09 pm

    Just Watchin :

    Just Watchin :
    Here’s a comment that I’m sure will be REALLY well received, but consider this: what if failure of this act winds up costing minimum wage earners? By that I mean, there is already acceptance of a $10 / $10.50 per hour range in California. To most workers (voters), a 50% increase from $8 to $12,to be honest, smacks of greed. When was the last time anyone got a 50% raise? If the Act goes down, and exit polling indicates that an increase to $ 10 / hour would have passed, did you just cost minimum wage earners $4000 a year?

    No opinion here Bill?? How about you Mitch??

    Despite the protestations of the poor, of Mitch & Bill, greed is not confined to the wealthy. The poor and the middle class are every bit as infected with the bug.

  586. February 27, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    Let them eat cake! Asking for bread is a symptom of greed.

  587. February 27, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    Mexico has had bribery for a while but when Walmart bribed government officials in Mexico to grease their expansion they were violating US law. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Walmart is a corporate felon.

  588. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    JW,

    I have not formed an opinion about the wisdom of the proposed Eureka ordinance. I am, however, completely in favor of an increased minimum wage that would apply nationwide.

    An increase to $12 per hour, for someone who does the hard, hard work that many minimum wage jobs require, is not greed, it is justice.

    Bill Moyers put it this way:


    “If minimum wage workers saw the same massive increases in income that the America’s richest have enjoyed since the 1970s, the lowest-paid worker in America today would be making $28 an hour.”

    Incidentally, I emailed the Santa Fe mayor’s office earlier today, requesting clarification about what happened in 2007. Here’s the relevant part of the reply, from R. Alfred Walker, Assistant City Attorney:

    “Near the end of 2007, the Living Wage was scheduled to rise from $9.50/hour to $10.50/hour for 2008. There was an effort to delay the increase, and a compromise was reached to keep the Living Wage at $9.50/hour for 2008, tie future increases to the CPI index which was scheduled to be used in 2009 and in each year thereafter, and eliminate the limit on employees before the Living Wage applied. Thus, removal of the 25 employee threshold was the result of the legislative process, and the Living Wage now applies to all employers in Santa Fe. There was never a court decision requiring or leading to that result.

  589. Just Watchin
    February 27, 2013 at 5:28 pm

    Like it or not, agree with it or not, greed in this case is a matter of public perception. And it’s the public you have to convince. But you run the risk of costing those workers $4000 a year.

  590. Mitch
    February 27, 2013 at 5:31 pm

    I agree with “That Other Anonymous”:

    That Other Anonymous :

    “To most workers (voters), a 50% increase from $8 to $12,to be honest, smacks of greed.”

    I very much doubt that. I guess we’ll see.

  591. February 27, 2013 at 6:21 pm

    This is the only pending minimum wage legislation I can find at the moment in California. It will increase Californias minimum wage to 8.25 in 2014, and it will reach $9.25 in 2016 and will start indexing to inflation in 2017.

    That’s of course if it makes it through the Sacramento gridlock.

    $$$$$$$$$

    BILL NUMBER: AB 10 INTRODUCED
    BILL TEXT

    INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Alejo

    DECEMBER 3, 2012

    An act to amend Section 1182.12 of the Labor Code, relating to
    wages.

    LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

    AB 10, as introduced, Alejo. Minimum wage: annual adjustment.
    Existing law requires that, on and after January 1, 2008, the
    minimum wage for all industries be not less than $8.00 per hour.
    This bill would increase the minimum wage, on and after January 1,
    2014, to not less than $8.25 per hour. The bill would further
    increase the minimum wage, on and after January 1, 2015, to not less
    than $8.75 per hour, and on and after January 1, 2016, to not less
    than $9.25 per hour.
    This bill would provide for an adjustment to the hourly minimum
    wage beginning on January 1, 2017, and annually thereafter, to
    maintain employee purchasing power. The automatically adjusted
    minimum wage would be calculated using the California Consumer Price
    Index, as specified. The bill would prohibit the Industrial Welfare
    Commission from adjusting the minimum wage downward and from
    adjusting the minimum wage upward if the average percentage of
    inflation for the previous year was negative. The bill would require
    the Industrial Welfare Commission to publicize the automatically
    adjusted minimum wage.
    This bill would provide that its provisions not be construed to
    preclude an increase in the minimum wage greater than the formula
    would provide.
    Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
    State-mandated local program: no.

    THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

    SECTION 1. Section 1182.12 of the Labor Code is amended to read:
    1182.12. (a) Notwithstanding any other
    provision of this part, on and after January 1, 2007
    2014 , the minimum wage for all industries shall
    be not less than seven dollars and fifty cents ($7.50) per
    hour, and on and after January 1, 2008, the minimum wage for all
    industries shall be not less than eight dollars ($8.00) per hour
    eight dollars and twenty-five cents ($8.25) per hour
    and on and after January 1, 2015, the minimum wage for all industries
    shall be not less than eight dollars and seventy-five cents ($8.75)
    per hour and on and after January 1, 2016, the minimum wage for all
    industries shall be not less than nine dollars and twenty-five cents
    ($9.25) per hour .
    (b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (3), the minimum wage
    shall be automatically adjusted on January 1 of each year, commencing
    on January 1, 2017, to maintain employee purchasing power diminished
    by the rate of inflation that occurred during the previous year.

    (2) The minimum wage adjustment shall be made by multiplying the
    minimum wage in effect on December 31 of the previous year by the
    percentage of inflation that occurred during that year, and by adding
    the product to the wage in effect during that year. The resulting
    total shall be rounded off to the nearest five cents ($0.05). The
    Industrial Welfare Commission shall publicize the automatically
    adjusted minimum wage.
    (3) The Industrial Welfare Commission shall not adjust the minimum
    wage pursuant to this subdivision if the average percentage of
    inflation for the previous year was negative.
    (4) For purposes of this subdivision, the following terms have the
    following meanings:
    (A) “Percentage of inflation” means the percentage of inflation
    specified in the California Consumer Price Index for All Urban
    Consumers, as published by the Department of Industrial Relations,
    Division of Labor Statistics and Research, or its successor index.

    (B) “Previous year” means the 12-month period that ends on August
    31 of the calendar year prior to the adjustment.
    (c) The Industrial Welfare Commission shall not reduce the minimum
    wage prescribed by this section.
    (d) This section shall not be construed to preclude an increase of
    the minimum wage by the Industrial Welfare Commission in an amount
    that is greater than the rate calculated pursuant to subdivision (b).

    http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ab_10_bill_20121203_introduced.html

  592. Anony
    February 28, 2013 at 12:25 pm

    There is no Sacramento gridlock anymore. The Democrats and their union masters own it lock, stock and barrel. If this measure doesn’t pass it will only be because the Democrats don’t want it to.

  593. Anonymous
    March 1, 2013 at 9:11 am

    its sure cool how the fair wage people have a pet mod to delete posts while agreeing with everything they say

  594. Mitch
    March 1, 2013 at 9:17 am

    Dear Anonymous at 9:11,

    If you are concerned that your polite and on-topic post has not appeared, feel free to send it to missingheraldo@gmail.com, and I will make sure it appears.

  595. Mitch
    March 1, 2013 at 9:57 am

    As you know, Just Watching, it’s really easy to create an anonymous email account. And anyone choosing to comment here is already exposing their IP address. (To avoid exposing your IP address, just download and use Tor.) For that reason, plus the fact that it’s an inflammatory insult complete with Nazi reference, I deleted your comment claiming I wanted to force people to “show their papers,” collect their email addresses, and hand them over to Bill.

    If you have any polite and on-topic arguments, feel free to make them.

  596. March 1, 2013 at 11:50 am

    It’s so simple, Mrskiller2000 and RefFan. If you want to present polite and on-topic arguments, pro or con, on the proposed fair wage act, feel free. If you want to issue insults, discuss the blog, etc…, your comments will be deleted.

  597. Anonymous
    March 6, 2013 at 12:35 pm

    this conversation sure is dead now that Mitch deletes every other post

  598. Anonymous
    March 6, 2013 at 7:35 pm

    on that note, there was a post above this one earlier that agreed with anon#599, and an entire thread called “Thank You” that people were saying the same thing in seems to be gone too

    censorship is evil

  599. That Other Anonymous
    March 6, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    “this conversation sure is dead now that Mitch deletes every other post”

    Yeah, “only” 600 comments on this thread. Clearly debate has been completely squelched.

  600. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 9:44 am

    Scroll back about 100 or so posts, and then note the change of pace 50-ish posts ago. Mitch takes Highboldtage’s side and virtually nobody with any negative opinions’ comments are posted.

  601. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 9:50 am

    You could scroll back just four posts and read March 1, 2013, at 11:50 am. And then there’s the little matter of Mitch’s refusal to offer an opinion on the Eureka Fair Wage Act.

  602. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 10:03 am

    Anonymous :
    You could scroll back just four posts and read March 1, 2013, at 11:50 am. And then there’s the little matter of Mitch’s refusal to offer an opinion on the Eureka Fair Wage Act.

    what?
    posts 549, 559, 573, 592 and others. Mitch saying he has no opinion does not make it so, since he seems to be QUITE supportive (and a little patronizing of anyone who doesn’t side with Eurekaworker/Highboldtage).

  603. Anonymoose
    March 7, 2013 at 10:09 am

    I don’t mind if Mitch is helping Bill. Someone has to. Bill comes up with the most insipid ideas.

  604. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 10:13 am

    Mitch has been totally clear from the start. He is a supporter of national efforts to raise the minimum wage, he agrees it is too low, but he remains uncertain about the effect of the Eureka proposal.

    He also made a pointless attempt to force people to focus on the issue rather than scream insults. That was foolish. Not because it’s wrong. Just because it won’t work.

  605. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 10:19 am

    Where’d he say he was uncertain about the Fair Wage Act? I missed it.

  606. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 10:20 am

    The comments listed by March 7, 2013 at 10:03 am are supportive of reasoned discussion, not one side or the other. Mitch cites facts to replace speculation. If the facts happen to support one side, well, that’s the nature of facts. He invited additional facts, or corrections to the source he cited. Rather than be responsive with additional facts, the commenters disappeared, and will now cry censorship. That’s why the Herald is pointless. Bye.

  607. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 10:27 am

    Start with this: November 27, 2012 10:53 am. You could also look at November 26, 2012 at 12:10 pm. Or you could look at the original post and note it is phrased completely neutrally. So clever of him, to hide like that.

  608. Anonymous
    March 7, 2013 at 11:00 am

    “Mitch cites facts to replace speculation. If the facts happen to support one side, well, that’s the nature of facts. He invited additional facts, or corrections to the source he cited.”

    I’m sure someone will just call them irrelevant due to age, call them ‘opinions’ instead of ‘studies’, etc, but here’s some stuff:

    web.archive.org/web/20110629183749/http://www.house.gov/jec/cost-gov/regs/minimum/50years.htm

    I’d post links to the cases cited, but it’d trigger the spam filter for too many links. Highlight a case, CTRL+C, paste into google.

  609. John Morley
    March 7, 2013 at 11:06 am

    “You have not converted a man because you have silenced him.”

  610. Anonymous
  611. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 8:02 am

    They submitted 2700 sigs. Eureka has 27000 people living here. 10% isn’t enough to make it pass.

  612. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 9:39 am

    Brilliant observation #613!

  613. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 10:31 am

    Kind of a silly point, since I’ve never heard of anyone turning in more signatures than the number of people who will be needed to pass the initiative in question. The threshold for signatures is not meant to show that it will definitely pass, it’s meant to show that there is at least enough interest to make it worth putting it on the ballot. There may be enough votes to pass it, or there may not — that’s why it goes on the ballot, to answer that question.

  614. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 10:36 am

    Also, the initiative doesn’t have to receive 50% + 1 of the 27,000+ residents in order to pass, just 50%+1 of the number of people who actually cast a vote in that election.

    Anyone know how many people typically vote in Eureka elections? Obviously it isn’t 27,000+, because many of those residents are children, and therefore not eligible to vote in the first place, and even among all eligible voters, not all are registered (and even among registered voters, not all vote in a given election).

  615. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 12:11 pm

    About 9,000 ballots were cast for Eureka mayor in 2010. Getting more than 2,700 valid petitions signatures shows phenomenal support.

  616. phenomenal support
    March 11, 2013 at 12:16 pm

    To beg the government to collude with the Chamber of Commerce on how low to set the prevailing wage for tens of millions of Americans?

  617. Anony
    March 11, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    The whole problem with the signature gathering process is the low threshold that even the worst propositions can easily get over.

    Then we go to the campaign. The proponents can throw a dishonest or misleading title on it, throw in some dishonest and misleading advertising on it that gets the low information voters to thinking. Then if the opposition sits on its hands and the turnout is low real garbage can get passed.

    Calling this the “Fair Wage Act” wins the Lipstick on the Pig award for this year.

  618. Fair & Balanced
    March 11, 2013 at 12:38 pm

    What is “Fair” about the Government and Business colluding on how low they can pay us?

  619. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 12:47 pm

    Poor anony, stuck in a democracy. Now you know how the rest of us felt watching the country being destroyed by Bush.

  620. Just Watchin
    March 11, 2013 at 2:44 pm

    Anonymous :Poor anony, stuck in a democracy. Now you know how the rest of us felt watching the country being destroyed by Bush.

    I knew someone could denigrate Bush somehow. Bravo!! If you think Walmart is going to let this happen, you’re out of your freakin minds. Does it cost more to live in Eureka than in San Francisco?? $12 / hr. is greedy, plain and simple. And if they just asked for $10 / hr, ,it would probably pass. They are going to cost the minimum wage worker $2 / hr.

  621. Fair & Balanced
    March 11, 2013 at 3:11 pm

    What if American people, or people in general, refused to work for less than a Living Wage?

  622. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    “$12 / hr. is greedy, plain and simple.”

    If $12/hr is “greedy,” then the billions the Walton kids (who didn’t even build the business, just inherited it) make off the labor of those workers, amounts to greedy times a billion.

    But I don’t think WalMart will be stupid enough to oppose this initiative. At least not publicly. To do so would both cost them customers, and probably cause enough backlash to guarantee that the initiative passes (or passes by an even larger margin than it would have anyway). At most they might try to funnel some money into a “independent expenditure” group to campaign against it while keeping their name out of it. But that is risky, too, because, if caught, then not only will the story be WalMart trying to push local voters around to keep their workers impoverished and/or collecting government benefits, the story will be that Walmart got caught sneaking around trying to push local voters around to keep their workers impoverished and/or collecting government benefits. So I don’t think they’ll do much other than maybe encourage their managers to make donations to an anti-campaign, and sit back and hope it doesn’t pass, or that if it does pass, it doesn’t get any national media coverage that might inspire folks in other communities to try for something similar.

  623. Just Watchin
    March 11, 2013 at 4:14 pm

    Get real…..don’t compare $12/hr to the “Walton kids”……that’s just stupid. You didn’t answer the question: does it cost more to live in Eureka than San Fran? Once small business owners realize that they would eventually have to pay the same wage (and therefore not have an advantage), it’s not likely to pass, and it will have cost minimum wage workers $2/hr. Walmart won’t get involved unless it somehow passes……it clearly discriminates against large businesses.

  624. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 5:24 pm

    “don’t compare $12/hr to the ‘Walton kids’……that’s just stupid.”

    Only in the sense that the $12/hr workers actually, you know, work for their money.

    No, it doesn’t cost more to live in Eureka than San Francisco. But my answer to that is that workers there should be paid more than they are now, not that Eureka workers should settle for less.

    Your bullcrap about they will have “cost minimum wage workers $2 per hour” is just that: bullcrap. If you were here pushing for $10 an hour and got pushed aside for the $12 an hour approach, maybe you’d have some credibility. But you aren’t, and you don’t.

    “…it clearly discriminates against large businesses.”

    And there’s nothing they can really do about that, because no court has found that to be a problem. There are all sorts of laws and programs that “discriminate” between businesses based on the size of the business. Given all the advantages that large businesses already have, and all the benefits that small, often locally-owned businesses provide for a community, most people are more than happy to see small businesses given more leeway.

    Now there is actually a better argument as to this approach being unfair — one could argue that it is unfair to the workers in the small businesses. Interesting that in all the discussion about this, the opponents never seem to raise that point. Which is, I think, rather revealing as to the point of view of the opponents.

    As a practical matter, all employers — large and small — are competing in the same labor pool. As long as the job market is weak, and there are some people who are willing to accept a lower wage just so that they have some kind of job, small employers may be able to pay significantly less. But if (when) the labor market tightens up, they’ll find that unless they provide compensation that is at least reasonably close to that provided by the large employers covered under this law, they will lose their better employees to the better-paying jobs at the larger employers.

    It may also be that when it becomes clear that the higher wages didn’t really drive anyone out of business, and if fact direct more money back through the community in the form of wages, small employers may be more willing, and better able, to support a minimum wage hike that applies to them too.

  625. Just Watchin
    March 11, 2013 at 5:49 pm

    The city of Santa Fe dropped the”two tiered” wage program when their own city attorney said it would be rescinded upon appeal in a higher court, so you can drop the crap that no court had a problem with it. I’m actually pulling for it. It will be fun to watch the lawsuit drain the city’s resources, and you can somehow blame the local politicians. LMFAO !

  626. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 6:19 pm

    “when their own city attorney said it would be rescinded upon appeal in a higher court,”

    (1) Source?

    (2) A city attorney is not a judge, and their office is not a court.

    (3) If WalMart sues the city, they will look like the greedy bullies they are, and will lose a lot more money through lost customers than they would lose by paying their employees $12/hr, especially considering their most direct competitors will be paying the same. And they know that. Like I said, they’re greedy, but they’re not stupid.

  627. Just Watchin
    March 11, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    The local Walmart customers are price shoppers. They could care less about any lawsuit, which, by the way, will be a class action suit. The Walmart haters already don’t shop there.

  628. Anonymous
    March 11, 2013 at 8:49 pm

    Just Watchin missed the SCOTUS decision approving ACA, including its “discrimination” against businesses with over 50 employees who are required to provide health insurance for them. What a doofus.

  629. March 12, 2013 at 6:47 am

    I can think of two businesses that will be forced to close up shop if this passes. I’m sure there are more of them.

    This isn’t about being fair to anybody. This is about driving out competitors at the “expense” of the people. This will pretty much guarantee that prospective employers for all business that would require 24+ employees will open up shop at a different location. Businesses that are already here simply won’t be inclined to hire any more employees and will “trim the fat” and raise prices to compensate. Some may be forced to cut into the meaty part to keep afloat.

    Fewer jobs is not what we need in Eureka…. We already have enough jobless/homeless….

  630. George Read
    March 12, 2013 at 7:56 am

    I can think of more than 2 businesses that failed after slavery was outlawed. We need jobs that pay a Living Wage. People should refuse to work for less than a Living Wage, anywhere!

  631. Anonymous
    March 12, 2013 at 8:09 am

    San Jose Businesses Adjust As Minimum Wage Hike Takes Effect

    March 11, 2013

    Related tags
    Measure D, Minimum wage, Minimum Wage Increase, San Jose

    SAN JOSE (CBS SF) — San Jose’s minimum wage officially rose to $10 an hour on Monday and business people who once opposed it now see it as a way to boost worker productivity and profits, a business leader said.

    “It’s the classic making lemonade out of lemons,” said Scott Knies, executive director of the San Jose Downtown Association at a news conference in downtown San Jose to announce a new promotion campaign in light of the wage hike.

    The association last year joined other business groups speaking out against Measure D, a ballot proposition to raise the hourly minimum wage in the city from $8 to $10.

    Measure D passed in November with almost 60 percent voter support and took effect Monday, giving full-time minimum wage workers about $250 extra income a month.

    San Jose businesses now want to raise awareness with customers to spend their money in San Jose for ethical reasons and support a local economy that pays low-wage employees more, Knies said.

    “Businesses are a pragmatic sort,” Knies said. “The law is in effect today. Whether or not you are for or against it you have to make the best of it.”

    After the election, Knies said the association worked with the South Bay AFL-CIO Labor Council, a worker group that campaigned in favor of Measure D, to launch a local business promotion called “Earn ‘n Spend in San Jose.”

    The promotion, which starts Monday, involves installing signs in city businesses urging both minimum wage earners and business customers to spend their money within San Jose versus other towns without a $10 minimum wage, he said.

    Knies added, however, that retail, food service, hotel and movie theater owners have told him they will have to either increase prices or simply absorb the cost of the higher wages.

    Some business people say they can’t raise prices in order to compete so they will have to work more hours themselves to cut expenses, Knies said.

    Other owners are reducing benefits for temporary workers and the hours employees work per shift, he said.

    Ben Field, executive officer of the labor council, said that the higher minimum wage would give affected employees $70 million more per year in their pockets.

    “Low-wage workers will be spending that money right here in San Jose,” Field said. “It’s like an economic stimulus package for the region.”

    Nick Taptelis, owner of Philz Coffee, a cafe that employs 25 minimum wage earners in downtown San Jose, said higher employee morale resulting from the wage hike will raise his profit margins.

    “I honestly believe that with the $10 increase everyone is going to have happier workers, more productive workers and I believe it’s actually going to increase business in downtown San Jose,” Taptelis said.

    Cindy Chavez, a former San Jose City Council member and vice mayor who campaigned for Measure D, said at the conference that the higher wage would help workers meet San Jose’s high housing costs.

    “Living in California and Silicon Valley in particular is very expensive,” Chavez said. “We believe that by pumping more money into employees’ pockets they are going to spend more and this will continue to be a vibrant place.”

    Chavez has been mentioned as a possible election candidate for District 2 of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to fill the seat of George Shirakawa who resigned March 1.

    She said she wants to hold off a decision to run at least until Tuesday when the Board of Supervisors intends to nail down a date for a special election in District 2 after voting tentatively last week to schedule one for June 4.

    “My family is in the process of talking it through,” Chavez said. “It is a short window.”

    http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/03/11/san-jose-businesses-adjust-as-minimum-wage-hike-takes-effect/

  632. Anonymous
    March 12, 2013 at 8:31 am

    George @ 756, your slavery analogy is apt.

    The monopoly capitalists and their boot-lickers want us to believe that raising wages will drive teenagers out of the workplace.

    It’s like Massa telling us “Hey, I can only afford so many house slaves, so when the cost of house slaves go up, I have to send a few of you to the fields. It’s a simple law of economics.”

  633. Anony
    March 12, 2013 at 9:39 am

    Fair & Balanced :
    What if American people, or people in general, refused to work for less than a Living Wage?

    Many do. Check out the St Vincent DePaul Dining Hall every day at noon. Check out the Post Office on the 3rd of each month as they collect their welfare checks.

  634. Anony
    March 12, 2013 at 9:42 am

    So even San Jose, where a modest home rents for $3,500 per month, recognizes that $12 per hour is greedy and has a $10 per hour minimum wage instead.

  635. Just Watchin
    March 12, 2013 at 10:12 am

    Regarding the above article on the San Jose min. wage: On the very first day it is implemented, it’s touted as “making lemonade out of lemons:? What is that based on?? If it’s such a good idea, why start a campaign begging residents to spend their money in San Jose for “ethical reasons”? And interesting that the number “25 minimum wage workers” was thrown out, making it sound like a two tiered program, when it is not. Read the link…..Anonymous left out several parts.

  636. Just Watchin
    March 12, 2013 at 10:13 am

    George Read :I can think of more than 2 businesses that failed after slavery was outlawed. We need jobs that pay a Living Wage. People should refuse to work for less than a Living Wage, anywhere!

    Can you name those businesses?

  637. Anonymous
    March 12, 2013 at 10:24 am

    JW is writing a book, “Cry Freedom, Dixie!” an unbiased, fair and balanced history of the antebellum South. Please assist him by providing the names of two businesses that went out of business when slavery was outlawed.

    Of course this has nothing to do with wages in Eureka,, but that’s the point as far as JW is concerned..

  638. Just Watchin
    March 12, 2013 at 10:25 am

    Anonymous :George @ 756, your slavery analogy is apt.
    The monopoly capitalists and their boot-lickers want us to believe that raising wages will drive teenagers out of the workplace.
    It’s like Massa telling us “Hey, I can only afford so many house slaves, so when the cost of house slaves go up, I have to send a few of you to the fields. It’s a simple law of economics.”

    But field slaves work harder and eat more than house slaves, and therefore cost more to keep. So much for your “simple law of economics”.

  639. Just Watchin
    March 12, 2013 at 10:30 am

    “If we work together, we’ll lower the cost of living for everyone…we’ll give the world an opportunity to see what it’s like to save and have a better life.” – Sam Walton

  640. HUUFC
    March 12, 2013 at 10:41 am

    If passing more laws and giving people everything they want is effective, why are indian reservations such miserable places?

  641. Anonymous
    March 12, 2013 at 10:54 am

    Anony :

    Fair & Balanced :
    What if American people, or people in general, refused to work for less than a Living Wage?

    Many do. Check out the St Vincent DePaul Dining Hall every day at noon. Check out the Post Office on the 3rd of each month as they collect their welfare checks.

    Don’t confuse a person who’s struggling to someone who’s given up. Many of those people are meth-addled hobos who couldn’t get a job if it involved passing a drug test or background check, nor stay sober long enough to get through an interview. I wish Atkins would hurry up and do what she said she wanted to about it.

    On that note, I wonder if the proposed pay increase will also cause an increase in aggressive panhandling?

  642. Helpless
    March 12, 2013 at 10:59 am

    I am unable to require that my employer pay me a Living Wage, so I am hoping that the Chamber of Commerce and the Government can come to some sort of collusion about paying me a little more. That and more food stamps. Help me Sacramento, because We the Sheeple can’t help ourselves!

  643. Coke in a Black Can
    March 12, 2013 at 11:05 am

    Just Watchin :
    Regarding the above article on the San Jose min. wage: On the very first day it is implemented, it’s touted as “making lemonade out of lemons:? What is that based on?? If it’s such a good idea, why start a campaign begging residents to spend their money in San Jose for “ethical reasons”? And interesting that the number “25 minimum wage workers” was thrown out, making it sound like a two tiered program, when it is not. Read the link…..Anonymous left out several parts.

    See the ‘related tags’ note? It’s lifted off the Fair Wage Folks’ blog. They’re kind of known for copy-pasting stories that they think are relevant to their cause, then deleting those pesky details that will hurt their argument from the text.

  644. Anonymous
    March 12, 2013 at 11:14 am

    It seems some of the sigs of those who signed the Fair Wage proposition are invalid, and the Fair Wage Folks are crying for help. Based on the tone of their blog post, I’m guessing it’s a lot f them, too.
    From their blog:

    “Greetings,

    Please check your voter status at this link: {Link in blog post}

    or at this mnemonic: {Link in blog post}

    It’s easy and we need your help.

    Over the past couple of weeks, while the Humboldt County Elections Office counts our Fair Wage Act petition signatures, we have learned some odd things about people who registered to vote in Eureka. While we find the staff at the Elections Office to be kind and helpful, there are people who’s voter registrations are being put into “inactive” status, or maybe not on the voter rolls at all.

    So, please check your voter registration status at the link above. Note whether your status is “Active” or “Inactive.”

    If you find that you are not registered or “inactive”, please give us a call at (707) 442-7465 or an email at info@fairwages.org. We want everyone who wants to vote to be able to. And everyone who signed the Fair Wage Act petition to count.”

    http://eurekafairwageact.wordpress.com/2013/03/07/check-your-voter-status-please/

    Aren’t you put on the ‘inactive’ list as a result of not voting in the past few elections? If anyone knows, please enlighten me…

  645. Just Watchin
    March 12, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    Just saw on TV that there was black smoke from the chimney at the Vatican. Guess we’re in for 6 more weeks of winter.

  646. Bruno
    March 12, 2013 at 12:24 pm

    “A historic palazzo in Rome that houses a key Vatican department is also the home of a well-known gay sauna.

    The Holy See paid 20m euros (£17.5m) in 2008 for around 20 apartments in the building for the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples.

    Its Prefect Emeritus, Cardinal Ivan Dias, is one of the priestly residents.

    The proximity to Europa Multiclub, billed as Italy’s top gay sauna, has drawn comment due to the Vatican’s strict stance on gay partnerships.

    The facility boasts a Turkish bath, Finnish sauna, whirlpools and massages….:”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-21753860

  647. Save Me!!!
    March 12, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    “A court has blocked a ban on the sale of large sugary drinks – including soda – from restaurants in New York City, a day before the law was to take effect.”
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21747568

  648. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 8:44 am

    Calif. Minimum Wage Doesn’t Pay the Bills: Report

    Workers earning minimum wage can’t afford rent in many SoCal cities

    By Heather Navarro and Angie Crouch
    | Tuesday, Mar 12, 2013 | Updated 7:46 PM PDT

    A worker earning minimum wage in California has to clock in more than three the standard 40-hour work week to renting a two-bedroom residents, according to a new report. The divide between wages and rent across America is growing, and California ranks fifth worst in the country. Angie Crouch reports from Beverlywood for the NBC4 News at 5 p.m. on March 12, 2013.

    Two Southern California counties ranked among the top ten most expensive places to rent in the country, and the advocacy group that released the list on Monday called for more low-income housing units in the region.

    California’s gap between minimum wage and housing affordability is the fifth worst in the country, behind New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Washington, D.C.

    Earning the state’s $8-per-hour minimum wage, Californians would need to clock in 129 hours per week — three times the standard 40-hour work week — to afford housing for $1,300 a month, according to National Low Income Housing Coalition’s annual report, which uses census and median income data.

    Residents in Orange and Ventura counties would need to earn at least $30 per hour — or work about 155 hours per week on minimum wage — to afford two-bedroom housing, according to the report.

    Los Angeles County did not make the top ten, but LA renters are not immune from increasing rents, low wages and a lack of affordable housing.

    “I’m from LA. I moved to Nevada, now I’m going back to Nevada because it’s ridiculous on the rent out here,” said Tashara McMullen.

    McMullen is among tens of thousands of minimum-wage earners in California who cannot afford to rent a decent apartment.

    “It’s not gonna work. You have to get another job to make it,” she said. “You rent $1,200 for a one bedroom – not gonna work, even with 40 hours.”

    The rates make it nearly impossible for LA renters to get ahead.

    “I’m under rent control for 20 years,” Ron Higgins said. “I’d like a change, and I can’t. I’m stuck.”

    President Barack Obama has pushed to raise the minimum wage, but Republicans argue businesses cannot afford it in the still-recovering economy.

    And with federal funding being slashed across the board, an expert said there’s no relief in sight.

    “We’ve experienced about a 40 percent cut in the federal funds that come to the city,” said Robin Hughes, president of Abode Communities.

    “The redevelopment agency was producing about $100 million a year for housing, and we’ve lost those resources.”

    Median rents vary widely in Los Angeles County. The median rent for a Brentwood home in 2009 was $2,148 while the median rent in Watts was $671, according to citydata.com.

    The Golden State ranked as the second most expensive place to rent in the United States, behind Hawaii.

    Rent Almost Out of Reach for Minimum Wage Earners

    http://www.nbclosangeles.com/video/#!/on-air/as-seen-on/Rent-Almost-Out-of-Reach-for-Minimum-Wage-Workers/197705201

  649. Just Watchin
    March 13, 2013 at 9:15 am

    Sounds like someone needs to go after those evil landlords, those greedy bastards. Is there a movement ubderway to address this issue?

  650. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 9:34 am

    @Anon 8:44 – Is that you, Bill? Done drinking all that bhang, then?

  651. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 10:10 am

    Whenever there’s any real open debate on this board the potheads always win over the right wing alkies. That’s because cannabis is a natural herb and alcohol is a drug. Cannabis enhances life and alcohol destroys it.

  652. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 5:44 pm

    Just Watchin :

    Anonymous :George @ 756, your slavery analogy is apt.
    The monopoly capitalists and their boot-lickers want us to believe that raising wages will drive teenagers out of the workplace.
    It’s like Massa telling us “Hey, I can only afford so many house slaves, so when the cost of house slaves go up, I have to send a few of you to the fields. It’s a simple law of economics.”

    But field slaves work harder and eat more than house slaves, and therefore cost more to keep. So much for your “simple law of economics”.

    But field slaves did the work supported them all from Master to field slave.

  653. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    Just Watchin :
    Regarding the above article on the San Jose min. wage: On the very first day it is implemented, it’s touted as “making lemonade out of lemons:? What is that based on?? If it’s such a good idea, why start a campaign begging residents to spend their money in San Jose for “ethical reasons”? And interesting that the number “25 minimum wage workers” was thrown out, making it sound like a two tiered program, when it is not. Read the link…..Anonymous left out several parts.

    Because raising the minimum wage is only part of the equation. People spending money in their own communities helps their own community’s economy and creates more business for the businesses paying higher minimum wages. If they are shopping at Walmart in Eureka instead of Walmart in Crescent City, they are helping to support workers and businesses in Eureka. If they shop at Costco instead of Walmart they are helping to pay better wages to Costco’s employees who spend it in other businesses. Of course if they shopped at Co-Op, ENF or other locally owned store which carries local products it would have an even greater positive impact.

  654. Anonymous
    March 13, 2013 at 8:24 pm

    If the people who live and work in San Jose go spend their money in Santa Clara to save a few cents due to the minimum wage increase they will be shopping themselves out of jobs.

  655. Anonymous
    March 14, 2013 at 6:58 am

    ‘Large retailer’ living-wage bill is moving forward in D. C.

    Posted by Mike DeBonis on March 13, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    Washington Post

    “Big box” stores like a Lowe’s planned for Northeast are targeted by Council Chairman Phil

    Mendelson’s bill (Jim R. Bounds/Bloomberg)

    A D.C. Council bill that would require the city’s largest retailers — including Wal-Mart, Costco,
    Home Depot and others — to pay higher wages is showing signs of life. The “Large Retailer Accountability Act,” introduced by Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) in January, will get a hearing next Wednesday before the council’s Business, Consumer and Regulatory Affairs committee.

    The bill would require “large retailers” — defined as businesses operating an indoor store of at least 75,000 square feet and whose corporate parent has sales of at least $1 billion — to pay wages no lower than $11.75 per hour plus, benefits. That “living wage” would be indexed to the local consumer price index every year.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mike-debonis/wp/2013/03/13/large-retailer-living-wage-bill-is-moving-forward/

  656. Just Watchin
    March 14, 2013 at 7:24 am

    Bill…….why aren’t you posting under your real name lately? BTW…..D.C. councilman Marion Berry is on board with this bill. Must be some free crack in it somewhere.

  657. Anonymous
    March 14, 2013 at 7:39 am

    via Calitics

    On Sunday the Los Angeles Times published a story about the important successes of campaigns to pass local minimum wage and living wage laws. However, while highlighting new developments that will impact local economies and the lives of workers, the Times missed the real story and forces behind this growing trend.
    The piece focused on two ballot-box victories for living wage laws: a minimum wage for hotel workers in Long Beach and a citywide minimum wage increase in San Jose.

    “The victories put these two California cities on the cusp of an emerging trend,” wrote Wesley Lowery. “Ballot initiatives, labor experts say, have the potential to rewrite labor’s playbook for how to win concessions from management.” Throughout the piece, Lowery presented the minimum wage ballot measures as a tactic put in place and managed from behind the scenes by labor leaders.

    In fact, both measures were conceived and carried to victory by broad coalitions of people and organizations interested in improving their cities – together with key labor partners who see their role as improving the lot of all workers’ lives. The San Jose measure germinated in a San Jose State University class, whose students – none of them yet labor leaders to my knowledge – studied the concept in 2010 and presented what was to be taken up by a citywide movement. Groups such as the United Way of Silicon Valley, the NAACP of San Jose and the Jewish Federation of Silicon Valley probably didn’t see themselves as puppets dancing on the strings of labor leaders; they no doubt saw themselves as partners with union members and leading organizations, such as Working Partnerships USA, in pursuing shared missions to mitigate poverty, address inequality and improve the lives of working people.
    As with Long Beach, the labor movement was not “behind the scenes” but out front in partnership with community allies with a vision about how to improve our economy.

    Dozens of small businesses jumped on board to support the Long Beach minimum wage for hotel workers. They recognized that higher pay for low-wage workers would immediately translate into more money spent locally – a natural stimulus for an economy struggling to leave the recession behind.

    Long Beach residents felt that large hotels owed something to the community, since their success was supported in part by millions of dollars in taxpayer investment and development subsidies. In Long Beach, as in San Jose, students also played an important role. Students from Long Beach State University and local colleges and high schools bucked their generation’s reputation for political apathy, joined the movement and took leadership in shaping their communities.

    Far beyond seeking “concessions from management,” supporters and voters saw these measures as concrete ways that voters could use to address economic problems and set their cities on a better course. At least as important as the narrative of these measures as a growing tactic is the story of the overwhelming support they found with the general public. The San Jose measure, which raised the minimum wage from California’s $8 to $10 per hour, passed with 58 percent of the vote, despite the opposition outspending supporters two to one. The Long Beach measure, setting a minimum wage of $13 per hour for workers in large hotels, passed with more than 64 percent of the vote.

    These totals represent massive public support – it should be noted that every ballot measure starts with an uphill climb to pass it, as voters’ default vote is usually “No.” The biggest takeaway from Long Beach and San Jose should be that voters – residents, students and business owners – don’t find the status quo acceptable. Long Beach and San Jose voters, like all of us, live in an economy marked by extreme inequality and wages that don’t keep up with living costs, despite record profits for employers. When given an option of making concrete change — and shown the way forward by an energetic and diverse coalition – voters will embrace it.

    http://www.calitics.com/diary/14905/la-times-misses-the-story-behind-living-wage-campaigns

  658. Just Watchin
    March 14, 2013 at 9:45 am

    Hey minimum wage earners…..your leader, (Eurekaworker, Highboldtage), has some ideas on how to spend your new found wealth:

    “Your Constitutional Right to Cannabis

    You and I have a Constitutional Right to grow, to possess, and to consume cannabis sativa and its variants.

    Really you do. I want all of you lawn order Democrats to read this. I want all of you Tea Partiers to smoke this. I want all of you cryptofascists to read this. I want all of you Christians to read this.

    I have pointed out to people in debates for years that it says right in the Constitution that you have a right to grow, possess, and yes! smoke cannabis sativa if you so choose. These people (some of them are well meaning but just ignorant) challenge me to point out the words in the Constitution that guarantee me the right to use cannabis sativa.

    I tell them it is right there, right next to the words that guarantee them the right to manufacture, possess and consume alcohol. It’s right there, can’t you see it? Of course you can.

    Because when the Constitution was ratified and the Bill of Rights was ratified the cultivation and processing and yes! the smoking of india hemp (cannabis sativa and its cultivars) was perfectly legal in the newborn United States of America. As a matter of fact, so was the production and use of alcohol. That is why a century later that miserable exercise in prohibition against alcohol required a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw alcohol.

    It is time for the government to give up the war on hemp and move on. The War on Hemp is Un-Constitutional

    It is over.

    We the People have the Constitutional Right to use cannabis in any one of its four uses: spiritual, medicinal, recreational and nutritional-industrial.”

    have a peaceful day,

    Bill

  659. Namae Gansaku
    March 15, 2013 at 1:32 pm

    OMG, that totally makes me reconsider signing the thing, knowing it was written by stoner trash like that. How the hell am I supposed to take Bill, Verbana or whoever seriously when they just hide from life behind a bong? I bet the reason they want more money is so they can buy more weed. Oh wait, he’s retired, right? Well, wait, then why the hell does he even care since it won’t benefit him? Nobody ever does anything unless it benefits them somehow, it’s human nature. I’m confused. I wonder if I can un-do me & my girlfriend’s signatures?

  660. Just Watchin
    March 15, 2013 at 2:54 pm

    To Anonymous #661…. Bill, why don’t you post under your own name?

  661. Anonymous
    March 15, 2013 at 3:09 pm

    When you get right down to it, #661, it is in Bill’s best interest to have the people he, and all of us, have to deal with every day make a living wage. It is in Bill’s best interest to live in a community with less poverty, less need for welfare and more people with money in their pockets to spend. Whose interests are not served by improving our local economy? The dividing line seems to be between those who care only for their own immediate gain and those who can see the big picture and understand we are all in the same economy. Your paycheck helps to pay my paycheck and vice versa.

  662. Anonymous
    March 15, 2013 at 3:38 pm

    Just Watchin :
    To Anonymous #661…. Bill, why don’t you post under your own name?

    You mean he should use his real name like you do, JW?

  663. Just Watchin
    March 15, 2013 at 3:42 pm

    Anonymous :

    Just Watchin :To Anonymous #661…. Bill, why don’t you post under your own name?

    You mean he should use his real name like you do, JW?

    Just the name he’s known by. And who are you to talk, “Anonymous”? …..Dumbass.

  664. Anonymous
    March 15, 2013 at 3:44 pm

    It makes it a lot harder to troll when everyone is anonymous, isn’t it dumbass?

  665. Just Watchin
    March 15, 2013 at 3:55 pm

    Anonymous :
    It makes it a lot harder to troll when everyone is anonymous, isn’t it dumbass?

    Not really. Anyone without at least the creativity to come up with some name to distinguish themselves gets lumped into the”dumbass” category. It actually makes my job easier, dumbass.

  666. Anonymous
    March 16, 2013 at 7:10 am

    Minimum Wage Doomsayers Are Still Wrong After 74 Years

    Donald Cohen, Hufington Post

    Few American institutions have been subjected to such a consistent stream of vitriol and assault as the minimum wage that celebrates its 74th birthday this week. The first federal minimum wage was established when FDR signed the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) on June 25, 1938. The FLSA also established the 8-hour day, paid overtime and child labor protections into federal law. Since then, it has been amended nine times to expand coverage and to raise the wage to keep it in line with the nation’s economic growth.

    Business leaders, industry associations, politicians and more recently think tanks opposed the FLSA and every legislative amendment since. They said it would destroy American civilization, kill jobs and hurt black people. Business owners predicted they would be forced into bankruptcy.

    One business opponent of the 1938 legislation even warned the minimum wage would lead to the decline of the American empire. In 1937 Guy Harrington of the National Publishers Association testifying before a congressional committee claimed that “Rome, 2,000 years ago, fell because the government began fixing the prices of services and commodities. We, however, know what has always happened when governments have tried to superintend the industry of private persons. The final result has always been distress, misery and despair.”

    That same year the National Association of Manufacturers asserted that the FLSA “constitutes a step in the direction of communism, bolshevism, fascism, and Nazism.”

    Fast forward to 1960 and, despite those warnings, American democracy was alive and well. The American middle class was the largest in world history. That didn’t stop the doomsaying.

    Business lobbies claimed that a 1961 proposal to increase the wage would shutter thousands of businesses across the American heartland. Ernest Kuhn, the manager of the Hanford Hotel in Mason City, Iowa, said that the hotel would be forced to close if the wage was increased to $1.25 per hour. “There is not enough mechanization or automation yet developed to save my business from the minimum wage horror. If minimum wage legislation is passed by Congress, you will be able to buy hotels cheap.”

    Perhaps he was right. The Hanford Inn, operated by the Kuhn Hotel Corp. finally closed in 2009. The minimum wage is clearly a slow-motion killer. The minimum wage has been increased six times since 1961.

    Similarly, Joseph E. Chastain, owner of Lintz’s 10 department stores in Texas and Oklahoma said that a proposed 1966 increase from $1.25 to $1.75 per hour would devastate his business. “No company our size can live under such circumstances. Undoubtedly we would have to liquidate, which is a distressing situation to confront a solvent company that has operated profitably for over 60 years.”

    In yet more evidence of the slow-motion minimum wage disaster, Lintz’s Texas store closed in 2000 and the entire chain closed all their stores in 2007.

    The assault continued unabated in recent decades.

    Economist Milton Friedman, interviewed in Playboy magazine in 1973 said, “I’ve often said the minimum-wage rate is the most anti-Negro law on the books. It’s hard to believe that Friedman hadn’t heard of the Jim Crow laws throughout the south.

    In 1980, presidential candidate, Ronald Reagan, claimed that “The minimum wage has caused more misery and unemployment than anything since the Great Depression.”

    In 1993, the owner of Mega Management Company that owns 95 Burger King franchises in the U.S., Canada and the Netherlands said that “creeping socialism begins at the $5.05 level.” As New York Times columnist Joe Nocera reported, the Burger King Corporation was purchased, leveraged and resold by Goldman Sachs and two private equity firms (including Bain, of course). The private equity firms pulled $1 billion out of the fast food company, funds that according to one Wall St. expert could have been used to help the struggling company — and certainly to pay its employees a higher minimum wage.

    And in 1995, Jack Farris, president of the National Federation of Independent Business claimed that President Clinton’s proposed 90 cents per hour minimum wage hike from $4.25 to $5.15 was “a regressive and job-killing scheme which will put a big dent in small-business hiring.” According to County Business Patterns data, employment in businesses with fewer than 20 employees grew by almost two million workers between 1995 and 2000. Oops.

    Despite these (and more) constant predictions of doom, the minimum wage remains wildly popular in the eyes of the American people. They understand basic economics — when wages go up, people spend more. Without minimum wage laws, employers pay less. They understand what I’ll call “Chris Rock-onomics,” the economic theory the comedian and social commentator described recently like this: “I used to work at McDonald’s making minimum wage. You know what that means when someone pays you minimum wage? You know what your boss was trying to say? It’s like “Hey if I could pay you less, I would, but it’s against the law.”

    Happy Birthday, minimum wage.

  667. Anonymous
    March 16, 2013 at 8:37 am

    Treating labor (people) like a commodity leaves out the very salient fact that grain or oil doesn’t have to be fed when it is sitting idle, it won’t starve to death and it won’t revolt.

  668. Despair of all the non thinkers
    March 16, 2013 at 9:47 am

    Minimum wage increases DO have an impact and everybody knows it even the biggest Kool Aide drinking liberal.

    Otherwise the liberals would be demanding a minimum wage of $25 per hour and make the whole world middle class?

    Now that important point is settled we are only talking a matter of degree.

  669. Anonymous
    March 16, 2013 at 10:45 am

    Yeah, or a million dollars an hour. It’s all the same.

  670. The Anonymighty
    March 17, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    Apparently this discussion is now in the ‘Quick Notes’ thread.

  671. Anonymous
    March 17, 2013 at 9:05 pm

    CONCLUSION

    http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/bigbox_livingwage_policies11.pdf

    http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/research/walmart.shtml

    Should policy makers consider supporting legislation that would raise wages at Walmart? Should they be concerned that low-income shoppers will bear the cost if Walmart is required to increase its minimum wage to $12 an hour?

    Our data suggests that a $12 per hour minimum wage standard at Walmart would be effective in aiding lower-income families. If Walmart increased its minimum wage to $12 per hour, 41.4 percent of the income gain would accrue to workers with wages below 200 percent FPL. These low-wage workers could expect to earn an additional $1,670 to $6,500 a year in income.

    If Walmart passed on 100 percent of the wage increase to consumers through price increases, which is unlikely, the impact for the average Walmart shopper would be $12.49 a year (Table 6, page 8). We estimate that 28.1 percent of the impact of the price increase would be borne by shoppers with incomes below 200 percent FPL.

    Finally, we should consider the impact of a mandated wage increase on the economic viability of big box retailers. Some analysts suggest that Walmart could not just raise wages, and prices, given that it operates in a competitive environment. However, a living wage policy would require all large retailers to operate under the same standards.

    Jacobs, Graham-Squire, and Luce | APRIL 2011 7

  672. Anonymous
    March 18, 2013 at 8:46 am

    Published on Mar 15, 2013

    Senator Elizabeth Warren’s Q&A at the March 14, 2013 Senate HELP Committee hearing titled “Keeping up with a Changing Economy: Indexing the Minimum Wage.” Witnesses include Brad Avakian , Commissioner, Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries, Portland, OR; Dr. Arindrajit Dube , Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA; Lew Prince , Managing Partner, Vintage Vinyl, St. Louis, MO; Carolle Fleurio , Restaurant Worker, Jonesboro, GA; Melvin Sickler , Franchisee, Auntie Anne’s Pretzels and Cinnabon, Williamstown, NJ; David Rutigliano , Owner, Southport Brewing Company, Trumbull, CT

  673. HUUFC
    March 18, 2013 at 9:48 am

    She sure knows a lot of facts, why didn’t she know she wasn’t an indian?

  674. Just Watchin
    March 18, 2013 at 2:48 pm

    That’s just it….. she DID know that she wasn’t indian. Just another libtard saying what they need to say.

  675. Anonymous
    March 19, 2013 at 7:47 am

    Refuting Neoclassical Economic Arguments

    By Bradley Silverman Guest Columnist

    Monday, March 18, 2013 Bradley Silverman

    Brown University Daily Herald

    http://www.browndailyherald.com/2013/03/18/silverman-13-minimum-wage-column-flunks-on-all-counts/

    Recently, Oliver Hudson ’14 argued that raising the minimum wage will increase unemployment (“The $9.00 minimum wage: A policy to increase unemployment,” March 7). His claim is empirically unfounded. A 1994 paper by Princeton economists David Card and Alan Krueger found no employment impact of an increase in the New Jersey minimum wage. The study used a cross-sectional method to compare changes in employment outcomes between New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania, which have similar seasonal patterns of employment. Using information gathered from employers before and after the increase, the authors found no statistically significant change in employment.

    Card published two other minimum wage studies in 1992. One used regional variations in wages to measure the impact of an increase in the federal minimum wage. The other compared employment changes in California, which increased its minimum wage in 1987, with outcomes in similar states that did not increase their wages. Both found raising the minimum wage transfers wealth from employers to workers, but has no effects on overall employment rates. Numerous studies since 1992 have shown similar results. One 1994 paper that replicated the Card and Krueger study using administrative data rather than survey responses did find a negative relationship between employment and the minimum wage. However, it drops certain data included in the original paper. When these are restored, no employment impact is found.

    Hudson candidly acknowledges the Card and Krueger study, although he incorrectly states that it found a positive relationship between employment and the minimum wage — the correlation wasn’t statistically significant. Many studies showing an adverse impact on employment use flawed time-series analysis examining all cross-state variation in minimum wages to estimate employment effects. Perhaps Hudson understands that this approach fails to account for numerous unobserved variables that can yield false conclusions. Moreover, when updated with more recent data, the negative link between employment and the minimum wage often disappears. Hudson cites no evidence to support his premise, only that which debunks it. His is the rare column that refutes itself.

    Hudson also notes that “the economics profession leans strongly toward endorsing the textbook view that a minimum wage increases unemployment.” This in and of itself is neither revelatory nor interesting. Diverse groups possess superior wisdom to individuals when they benefit from the aggregated contributions of each member’s unique knowledge. However, crowd wisdom requires that discrete opinions be unique and independent. Many economists base their opinion not on firsthand research or independent observation but on signals from others — i.e., conventional wisdom. The result of individuals basing opinions on others’ views rather than private information is an information cascade. When these occur, crowds are likely to make incorrect decisions. Furthermore, there is significant evidence of a publication bias in favor of studies showing a significant negative link between employment and the minimum wage.

    More disturbingly, Hudson asserts that “empirical studies do not provide enough evidence to reject the theoretical model.” Hudson’s conception of scientific inquiry is backwards. Theories are only credible to the degree that they accurately explain real-world phenomena. Until supported by empirical evidence, theory by itself lacks explanative authority. The dominant explanation for the cholera epidemic in Europe in the early 1800s wasn’t germs or infection but the “miasmas” theory that illness is caused by tiny airborne poison particles. Theories can be conjured to support anything. This doesn’t make them true.

    The neoclassical theory of supply and demand rests on three assumptions: perfectly competitive input markets, perfectly competitive output markets and diminishing marginal utility of labor and capital. If any of these assumptions are violated, the model is invalidated. In real life, all three are suspect.

    There is a theory that explains how increasing the minimum wage can have no effect on, or increase, employment. The monopsony model, an alternative to neoclassical theory, disregards the unrealistic assumption of perfectly competitive labor markets.

    It holds that employers are price-setters, meaning they have market power in determining wage levels. Employers set workers’ wages rather than accepting wages given by the market. This means they cannot hire as many workers as they want at the prevailing wage, as neoclassical theory assumes. If they want to hire more, they must raise wages. Because raising wages entails paying more to all existing workers as well, the marginal cost of labor exceeds labor supply, allowing employers to maximize profits by paying workers less than the “equilibrium” intersection of marginal cost and marginal revenue, accruing rents.

    When a minimum wage is set, however, the marginal cost and labor supply curves partially converge, which can cause profit-maximizing employers to both raise wages and hire more workers. So long as the increase is small, raising the minimum wage constitutes a pure wealth transfer from employers to workers, reducing deadweight loss and increasing efficiency.

    Karl Popper wrote that “the scientific status of a theory is its falsifiability.” When a theory persists despite its failure to withstand empirical scrutiny, adherence is based in ideology, not fact. Writing on religion, Richard Dawkins criticized the attitude that the “book is true, and if evidence seems to contradict it, it is the evidence that must be thrown out not the book.” Hudson’s opposition to increasing the minimum wage is itself religious dogma, not scientific belief.

  676. Anonymous
    March 19, 2013 at 8:24 am

    Anyone remember the conventional wisdom about Obama (rhymes with Osama) winning in 2008? Beating Hillary Clinton? Winning against McCain/Palin, the darlings of the triumphant right?

    Conventional wisdom sucks. Experts are wrong a lot.

  677. Just Watchin
    March 19, 2013 at 9:02 am

    Anonymous #679 (Stoner Bill / Eurekaworker)……. trotting out studies that are 20 years old is hardly credible. You don’t think the dynamics of the economy has changed in 20 years?

  678. Just Watchin
    March 19, 2013 at 9:15 am

    Just Watchin :Hey minimum wage earners…..your leader, (Eurekaworker, Highboldtage, Stoner Bill Holmes), has some ideas on how to spend your new found wealth:

    “Your Constitutional Right to Cannabis
    You and I have a Constitutional Right to grow, to possess, and to consume cannabis sativa and its variants.
    Really you do. I want all of you lawn order Democrats to read this. I want all of you Tea Partiers to smoke this. I want all of you cryptofascists to read this. I want all of you Christians to read this.
    I have pointed out to people in debates for years that it says right in the Constitution that you have a right to grow, possess, and yes! smoke cannabis sativa if you so choose. These people (some of them are well meaning but just ignorant) challenge me to point out the words in the Constitution that guarantee me the right to use cannabis sativa.
    I tell them it is right there, right next to the words that guarantee them the right to manufacture, possess and consume alcohol. It’s right there, can’t you see it? Of course you can.
    Because when the Constitution was ratified and the Bill of Rights was ratified the cultivation and processing and yes! the smoking of india hemp (cannabis sativa and its cultivars) was perfectly legal in the newborn United States of America. As a matter of fact, so was the production and use of alcohol. That is why a century later that miserable exercise in prohibition against alcohol required a Constitutional Amendment to outlaw alcohol.
    It is time for the government to give up the war on hemp and move on. The War on Hemp is Un-Constitutional
    It is over.
    We the People have the Constitutional Right to use cannabis in any one of its four uses: spiritual, medicinal, recreational and nutritional-industrial.”
    have a peaceful day,
    Bill

  679. Please think!
    March 19, 2013 at 9:24 am

    Raising the minimum wage at some point does increase unemployment, there is not doubt about it. Otherwise Bill would be pushing for a $25 an hour minimum wage.

    Does $9 threaten a lot of harm? Probably not. But remember full service gas stations? Remember when grocery stores delive