Nationwide, the Federal poverty level for a single-person household is $10,890 [link]. That would come to about $5.24 an hour if you had a 40-hour workweek. Most minimum wage earners don't work 40 hours, though.

Sorry. HTML fail.
Link (new window)

Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

Or, like tons of other working poor do, you take the bus in from Oakland/Richmond/Fremont or whatever.

lohphat: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

I know of several places I frequent that they indeed have layed-off people to deal with the mandated higher operating costs.

Why did they have staff they didn't need?

jackiepaper: mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

You can find a room in a 3 or 4 bedroom for around 700, and shiatty studios are still going for around 1200 (as low as 1050 in some parts of the Tenderloin). coupled with the fact that most people in SF who make minimum wage supplement their income with tips, and things aren't all that terrible, if you're young.

Having recently apartment shopped in SF, the studios going for 1050 are bed bug and rat feces infested shiat holes(seriously...i've lived in some shiatty places and would NEVER live in one of these...the street is cleaner). Getting anything larger than a shoebox and able to hold a queen size bed is going to run you over $1800 unless you live in the richmond, outer sunset or excelsior...anything in a habitable area outside of those places is going to run well over $2300 for a tiny 1br(or even a studio in some places)

ZAZ: Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

Does SF have an ordinance prohibiting more than three unrelated people from living together? Such laws are common.

Its allowed if they are having an orgy.

Fabric_Man: Most minimum wage earners don't work 40 hours, though.

Yeah that's half the problem, they don't get full time because then the company would have to offer benefits. Also I'm all for taxing business, but payroll taxes kill jobs, when an employer has to match the taxes it's employee pays it add up quick. It also makes overtime so expensive that most employers avoid at all cost, so to say.

jackiepaper: godhatesu: jackiepaper: mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

You can find a room in a 3 or 4 bedroom for around 700, and shiatty studios are still going for around 1200 (as low as 1050 in some parts of the Tenderloin). coupled with the fact that most people in SF who make minimum wage supplement their income with tips, and things aren't all that terrible, if you're young.

Having recently apartment shopped in SF, the studios going for 1050 are bed bug and rat feces infested shiat holes(seriously...i've lived in some shiatty places and would NEVER live in one of these...the street is cleaner). Getting anything larger than a shoebox and able to hold a queen size bed is going to run you over $1800 unless you live in the richmond, outer sunset or excelsior...anything in a habitable area outside of those places is going to run well over $2300 for a tiny 1br(or even a studio in some places)

The Richmond aint that bad at all. Great restaurants and bars, good produce and general shopping. It's just a couple of degrees colder is all.

Not at all, also tons of nubile and drunk college girls. Used to live in the mission myself until I got priced out of it, and by the bridge theater in the richmond until that too got too expensive...cabs twice a weekend when shiatfaced eats at the wallet.

mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

And people wonder why there's been a rise of hipster communes. They live 20 to a house because they're forced to, and then the whole commune thing kicks in and you get that awful, awful culture thing.

ZAZ: Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

Does SF have an ordinance prohibiting more than three unrelated people from living together? Such laws are common.

& unenforceable.

Landlords / College kids only get tagged with it if they were throwing a huge party and get caught. Even then it's not common.

It's just to appease the get off my lawn crowd living around college campuses and those normal folk forced to live in the ghettos.

TyrantII: mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

And people wonder why there's been a rise of hipster communes. They live 20 to a house because they're forced to, and then the whole commune thing kicks in and you get that awful, awful culture thing.

actually, most of those are over in the east bay. all the good warehouse spots got turned in to complexes.

mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city.

No, they shouldn't. They should be ~1/4 by any classic metric(such as the frontend ratio). What they are today in urban areas is far more than they should be(your 40%).

tjsands1118: Fabric_Man: Most minimum wage earners don't work 40 hours, though.

Yeah that's half the problem, they don't get full time because then the company would have to offer benefits. Also I'm all for taxing business, but payroll taxes kill jobs, when an employer has to match the taxes it's employee pays it add up quick. It also makes overtime so expensive that most employers avoid at all cost, so to say.

I'm all for eliminating payroll taxes, but profits should be taxed at 80% with no option's of creative accounting to store in in a overseas holding co. If citizens abroad have to pay income taxes, so should corporations who want to base out of the US. They're not going to be leaving.

Plus taxing profits would be a good incentive to roll money back into your enterprise in capital improvements. Something severely lacking in today's quarter to quarter outlook economy.

mrshowrules: I live in Ottawa and the minimum wage here is $10.25. You can get a very nice 1 bedroom apartment for less than $1,000 plus free unlimited health care and that changes everything. I think many Americans literally can't afford to become sick.

I'm paying $600 a month for a single room in a condominium house in Ottawa, with its own washroom on top of the other actual amenities shared all around, and that's because I had to wait way too long before the school season started before I was able to start looking for accommodations.

shiat's cheaper than back in podunk small town, Alberta.

HotWingConspiracy: lohphat: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

I know of several places I frequent that they indeed have layed-off people to deal with the mandated higher operating costs.

Why did they have staff they didn't need?

It's almost as if you're waving a huge red flag announcing how stupid you are. But in case you're really sincere and looking for a reasonable answer, here it is. The unnecessary staff were hot girls who give blowjobs. Since there was some extra money in the payroll budget, they hired blowjob girls. But when expenses rise, business owners have to cut back. Provide less employee benefits. Purchase lower cost inventory. Finding less expensive sources of financing. And less blowjobs. In this economy, everyone has to sacrifice.

ZAZ: Does SF have an ordinance prohibiting more than three unrelated people from living together? Such laws are common.

Local governments in CA are not allowed to set ordinances that are more restrictive than federal laws (state uses the following guideline: (2 * x bedrooms) + 1), plus that would violate the Fair Housing Act(familial status discrimination)

HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

Nah, they'll just fire a few legit, young US workers and hire more illegal aliens under the table to keep their costs static. But it's OK, teenagers aren't supposed to have jobs these days anyway, right?

bhcompy: ZAZ: Does SF have an ordinance prohibiting more than three unrelated people from living together? Such laws are common.

Local governments in CA are not allowed to set ordinances that are more restrictive than federal laws (state uses the following guideline: (2 * x bedrooms) + 1), plus that would violate the Fair Housing Act(familial status discrimination)

I won't speak to how common they are but they exist. They are considered brothels. Here's one:

Link (new window)

This will truly be the time that California's anti-business policies destroy the whole state. You may have heard the same thing for 30 years, but THIS time everyone is going to move to Topeka and Kommiefornia will be doomed!

Or it doesn't work and they change it back, whatever. I hate those jerks. Think they're so great.

MilesTeg: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

Nah, they'll just fire a few legit, young US workers and hire more illegal aliens under the table to keep their costs static. But it's OK, teenagers aren't supposed to have jobs these days anyway, right?

That would be illegal, sir, and as far as I know American business people are very law abiding.

Good to hear about the upcoming eradication of poverty in SF.

HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

No, it means there will be fewer hires. It won't result in absolutely no further hirings. Google downward sloping demand curve.

Debeo Summa Credo: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

No, it means there will be fewer hires. It won't result in absolutely no further hirings. Google downward sloping demand curve.

So how much has hiring been slowed by previous increases?

Hydra: Debeo Summa Credo: No, it means there will be fewer hires. It won't result in absolutely no further hirings. Google downward sloping demand curve.

Shhhh. They're talking about the minimum wage - don't try bringing up basic economics to them. They'll just call you a racist.

Pity there's no real world evidence to back up your claim.

Article fail.

Journalism tip: if you're going to say that something is a "first," you should spend 10 seconds googling it to see if it's really the first.

ZAZ: Does SF have an ordinance prohibiting more than three unrelated people from living together? Such laws are common.

I don't think so. As with all expensive cities, roommates are very common.

mrshowrules: Generally speaking, accommodations should be about 40% of your salary in any city. With a shiatty studio going for $1,500 a month you would hope someone was making about $3,750 a month. Assuming 40 hours a week / 160 hours a month, you really will have a tough time making less $23 an hour.

Flip that around and assume $10 minimum, that would be $1,600 a month, so you better hope you can find a place for $640 a month. Good luck with that. Maybe you can split a 2 bedroom with 4 co-workers.

You don't have to live in San Fran.

I'm just thinking about the economics of some of these things...

You'd think that the cities where you can't afford to live anywhere near on the wages being paid would find themselves unable to hire people.




Rational economic beings would pack up and move to where wages and rents are in sync. Humans don't move until after things have been stupid bad.

Detroit should have 100k people, the rest having moved to follow jobs, even if it meant taking nothing but a change of clothes and riding a bus.

SF should have a $15-20/hr average service industry wage. Otherwise it's not worth the ride into town, might as well move somewhere more practical.

/Has to get back to packing for his $675 800sft two bedroom.
//In a boring part of town.

HotWingConspiracy: Debeo Summa Credo: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

No, it means there will be fewer hires. It won't result in absolutely no further hirings. Google downward sloping demand curve.

So how much has hiring been slowed by previous increases?

I don't know. Without a portal to an alternate universe where everything else was held constant but the minimum wage wasn't increased we'll never know. We do know that demand for labor isn't perfectly inelastic, and that increasing the cost of a good that isn't perfectly inelastic reduces the quantity demanded.

Debeo Summa Credo: HotWingConspiracy: Debeo Summa Credo: HotWingConspiracy: Uh-oh, I think this means no businesses in SF are going to hire anymore! I've been assured that is the natural result of mandated wage increases.

No, it means there will be fewer hires. It won't result in absolutely no further hirings. Google downward sloping demand curve.

So how much has hiring been slowed by previous increases?

I don't know. Without a portal to an alternate universe where everything else was held constant but the minimum wage wasn't increased we'll never know. We do know that demand for labor isn't perfectly inelastic, and that increasing the cost of a good that isn't perfectly inelastic reduces the quantity demanded.

Ah. So it's totally unmeasurable.

And the very liberal city of SF continues to have some of the highest real estate values in the US.

Cons have told me the market is never wrong and accurately reflects what people want so in spite of their talk about how raising the min wage is destructive people still really want to live in SF.

If only there was a transportation system that would allow people living in a less expensive area to take to work and, say commute, to a more expensive area.