>>3772160>The ones we're talking about are [corporations]
Not if we're talking about a minimum wage that effects all employed persons.>Yeah that's how inflation works. You generally want to keep up>Literally fucking kill yourself. MUH ANECDOTES!
Let me rephrase that if you're fixated on the fact I used the word "anecdote": If you increase the minimum wage that businesses are allowed to pay their employees-especially if you couple that with tax increases- they will, with 100% certainty, raise the prices of the goods or services their businesses provide more than proportionally to those effective immediately after the ink on any such legislation has dried. In the end there will have been if anything lateral economic mobility. Some people will lose their jobs or at least have reduced hours at those jobs. All prices for all goods and services produced or performed domestically will increase markedly, the currency itself and all savings accounts will be proportionally devalued.
There has to be a more nuanced approach. Investigating and addressing the specific origins of runaway pricing on things like rent (building codes, regulations), healthcare (more regulations) and education (subsidies and loan guarantees) rather than blanket policy moves that end up exacerbating these existing problems and effectively subsidizing the organizations that started them.>We started at the bottom and now we up here
...and we owe that in part to the protectionist trade policies that prevented our economic landscape from being dominated by established firms in Europe. Substantial tariffs on imported goods were a factor in doing business with the US for longer than they weren't-and now we've simply come full circle. I'm not going to sit here and say that tariffs are a good policy for us right now, but they're simply being used as a negotiating tool that happens to be working:https://www.investors.com/news/economy/china-trade-deal-offer-to-trump-lifts-dow-jones/