Video: Mayoral candidates’ standing-room-only West Seattle faceoff

1 PM: We’re at the Senior Center of West Seattle, where the upstairs meeting hall is filled with people here to see and hear the two men vying to run Seattle for the next four years, Mayor Mike McGinn and State Sen. Ed Murray. This is expected to last an hour; we will be updating here live. We also are rolling video, so if all works out, we’ll be able to add that to this later. (ADDED 3:32 PM: Here it is, in its entirety, starting with the center’s executive director Karen Sisson and moderator Lucy Gaskill-Gaddis:)

1:05 PM: Five-minute opening remarks from each candidate, starting with McGinn. He goes through introductory comments – why he ran four years ago, how he took off in the “deepest economic recession since the Great Depression.” He contends Seattle has the “fastest-growing urban economy in the nation.” After listing a few other things, he reiterates, “We DO have economic growth.” He says they made a promise to neighborhoods like West Seattle that have been “accepting growth,” promises not yet kept, such as how transportation and other infrastructure will be handled. He mentions that Sound Transit (whose board he’s on) is studying getting light rail to West Seattle. He says, “I want to invest in all our neighborhoods,” including making it “safe to walk.” His 5 minutes are up.

1:11 PM: Now, Murray’s introduction. He gets quickly to his West Seattle roots, including his time at Holy Rosary School, and how he doorbelled with his mom when he was five “for John Kennedy for president.” He says “West Seattle is a special place,” and promises it “won’t be an afterthought” if he is elected. Moving on to his legislative work, he says he is working with seniors’ best interest in mind – he talks about regulation for home-health-care workers. As for why he’s running for mayor, he touts himself as “bring(ing) people together … I think Seattle is craving leadership that is willing to sit people down at a table” to find solutions “not just ideologically based, but (to) move us forward as a city.” Then: “This is a city that has a public safety problem … a transportation problem .. that cannot be blamed on the Legislature alone …” He mentions Tatsuo Nakata (not by name)’s death at the 47th/Admiral crosswalk in 2006, and accuses McGinn of “resistance” to the long-sought-after crosswalk there. The mayor says “That’s false.” (Here’s what happened: He had proposed money for a beacon and to study a traffic signal there; the City Council then upgraded that to full funding of a signal.)

1:15 PM: Now to Q/A. Audience members have filled out cards with questions. First one read by moderator Lucy Gaskill Gaddis: Transportation problems and density with many apartments on the way and Metro facing more cuts. “What practical solution do you advocate” to those, she asks. Murray first: “We’re going to have to create a high-tech war room of (many jurisdictions’) officials” to make sure that traffic can move through. He says he’s feeling “positive” about a transportation solution in the Legislature. He says “you can’t starve cars without transit to replace it.” Next, McGinn – he starts with an attempt at correcting Murray regarding the 47th/Admiral light, and touts current paving projects that are under way such as Delridge. Then: “This tunnel project … isn’t going to do that much for us in the long run.” Transit is the only way to solve things, he says. He says “a legislative session or something else” is needed to solve things. “Our local transit money is being held hostage to highway projects around the state.”

(EDITOR’S POST-DEBATE NOTE: Here’s our coverage of what happened re: the signal)

Murray rebuttal: “You can bash Olympia or you can choose to work with Olympia. Your senators (state) are not the reason transportation is not moving forward … What we’re missing is a partnership with the city of Seattle,” instead of bashing Olympia.

McGinn rebuttal: He says the legislature has “underfunded” many things. He addresses Murray directly: “You couldn’t keep control of the Senate, you couldn’t manage the budget … I’m not blaming everyone in Olympia … that was your job to keep the majority.”

1:24 PM: New question: What role do communities and social issues play in land use policy and development? First McGinn: Affordability is important. He says he’s appointed a stakeholder committee that’s drawing up a report. “If you ask for too much, (developers) won’t use the incentives to build affordable housing.” He gets quickly to the Whole Foods/4755 Fauntleroy Way SW alley-vacation opposition and why he thinks that wages are important.

Murray: He says he supports the concept of what the mayor did but “not how (he) did it” – after sighing, “The attacks go on.” He also responds to something McGinn said earlier regarding accountability and goes on to point out city fraud – rather than replying to the question that the moderator had asked.

New question: Public safety, and what will they do about it? Murray first brings up the Justice Department/Seattle Police situation, going back to the beginning, and suggests that the city fought the feds and instead led to “years of a police force that was in turmoil… and remains in turmoil.” And: “We have to admit we have a problem … not all crime is down in all parts of the city … We have to move forward on public safety” and mentions a Junction business walkthrough and hearing from businesses: “The same thing I hear from downtown, the same concerns.”

McGinn: “I would love to have a discussion about the future … but Sen. Murray’s campaign has not been about the idea, it’s about saying I can’t get things done, I can’t work with people. … Let’s talk about crime. When I took office, we did in fact have a police department not trusted by the community.” He says he took action including bringing in a Community Police Commission. And he touts the announcement earlier today of 15 more officers to be added. He says Murray passed bills that put felons on the street without dealing with mental-health issues. Murray rebuttal: This year, we expanded social services bigger than anything since the Johnson Administration, and mentions a Medicaid expansion which will mean “mental health funding … for people on the streets.” And he talks about people being released because they are “not violent offenders” after being accused of having “too many people” behind bars … “we were able to close an entire juvenile facility because we could put them in programs with best practices.” McGinn rebuttal: “I was referring to Senate Bill 5891 … with respect to mental-health services … we do have a situation where this state is 50th in terms of mental-health beds available.” He says interim Police Chief Pugel testified about the situation in Olympia, and a bill is pending to eliminate a tax exemption for tourists, to use the money to spend on mental health – “But the business community objected, the same business community that’s funding his campaign.” He accuses Murray of “pretty neat trick” to vote to let felons out without voting for mental-health funding.

1:37 PM: New question: What will you do or have you done to preserve industrial job base? McGinn: Funding a freight master plan, working with the Port to mitigate traffic impacts … “When you cross the West Seattle Bridge, you’ll see the new Harley Marine building … we changed the rules for that …” to accommodate their headquarters. He says he is working on job training because he hears from industrial firms that they need qualified people. “We’re fortunate to have multiple thriving sectors.”

Murray: “This city’s traditional industrial industry is a key part of the future of our economy … Preserving and growing that has not been a priority of this administration.” He says that both the SODO and Ballard industrial areas should be addressed with plans, and mentions the possible sports arena (which McGinn did not mention) could affect industry and that should be dealt with. He also mentions that Nucor’s predecessor, Bethehem Steel, is where his father worked. He says he would work with the Port to “design a brand-new industrial plan.” He then brings up the mayor’s claim about campaign funding: “(He) inferred my supporters are rich” and mentions supporters who are not. He says he’s “not trying to divide the city by saying ‘he’s the rich guy'” … “I’m not trying to divide this city.”

1:41 PM: Last question, budget priorities for the city? Murray: “Serious inventory of our infrastructure – not just the roads and streets, but also (utilities) …. when infrastructure fails, it’s the poor and elderly who get stuck. You can see it in New Orleans, you can see it back east … #2, public safety … #3, deal with the backlog of major maintenance … of crumbling sidewalks and streets … Then he mentions he’d like to see some of the talent from past administrations come back “so that our budget will be a sustainable budget and not a budget where you read about … fraud that was never addressed.” McGinn: “We discovered that fraud, removed that person …” And then he accuses Murray of not taking responsibility for an issue he had to deal with. “Our big challenge is that we are a growing city and not everyone gets to share in that prosperity … What we’re doing: #1, Early Learning Academy … working with the council on a plan for universal preschool … We’ve increased our spending on basic infrastructure 37% in the past (few) years even without new funding from the state … Transit Master Plan, working to get Sound Transit to the ballot by 2016 so our neighborhoods will get the transit they need … If the state won’t act (on transportation) we’ll figure out how to get the money we need.” He mentions again his roots as a neighborhood activist.

1:46 PM: Murray’s five minutes of closing remarks: He compliments the WS Senior Center for reaching out to LGBT seniors. “As I mentioned before, I have worked in Olympia for 18 years,” and he mentions that it took a long time for some things to get done, like the 17 years it took to pass marriage equality. “That’s what Olympia is like … you have to get people to the table…that’s why I want to be mayor … that’s the kind of leadership Seattle is craving.” He mentions he’s been endorsed by several City Councilmembers, “unusual when you have an incumbent who’s running.” He says West Seattle legislators have endorsed him as has County Councilmember Joe McDermott and the 34th District Democrats: “it’s good to be home in West Seattle … I want to work to bring this city together … I want to be a mayor who doesn’t spend two years fighting with the state over the viaduct.” He accuses McGinn of waiting four years to announce programs and says he will make announcements from the start. He says he grew up here as a “poor kid,” if “that kid from 61st Street would grow up to be the mayor of Seattle.”

1:50 PM: McGinn’s closing remarks – he says yes, Murray’s been a uniter, and rattles off corporation names. Then he says, yes, we all get contributions from all over the place. He says, “We’ve gotten a lot done … leading the nation in jobs … innovative new programs to hire local workers … doubled the Families and Education Levy … all of our libraries open on Sundays … rebuilding the Rainy Day Fund … and none of those things happened all by themselves … it took a team of people, the mayor and City Council .. to get them done … imagine what we can do if … I’ve been to ‘mayor’s school’. … I have made myself available, held myself accountable, passionate about this job, working to divest from fossil fuels, want universal preschool ….This city can be a leader demonstrating what it means to the world to live as a multicultural society … and other cities will look at us and say, ‘We want to be that city.’ … I would love to continue to be your mayor.”

1:53 PM: The forum is over and the two shake hands. A few minutes of mingling is promised for the standing-room only crowd. It was intense and lively and pointed; our words cannot quite convey it as well as the video will, and we will upload it as soon as we get back to HQ.

34 Replies to "Video: Mayoral candidates' standing-room-only West Seattle faceoff"

  • Fiwa Jcbbb September 17, 2013 (1:39 pm)

    I need to know if Ed Murray ever supported that ridiculous “Surface/Transit” idea. If he did, I’ll need to find another candidate. Mike McSchwinn seems like a nice enough guy, but I can’t get behind anyone who would sell out the way West Seattle gets to downtown to make the waterfront nicer for rich people and developers (especially laughable that The Stranger didn’t want Paul Allen’s “Commons” project on the grounds that it would just “create a nice lawn for rich people”), and I don’t think expecting non-wealthy people to add hours to their day and take the inherently slow bus is a morally feasible transportation “plan”. Would it be too much to ask for a civic leader who understands the difference between mass transit and rapid transit? Instead of making it economically painful for people to drive we could be making it more attractive to not drive.

  • nop September 17, 2013 (1:56 pm)

    Bye Mcginn. You have done a great job!! well at least for people riding Bikes. This town’s street’s and parking costs are a joke like your record.

  • alki forever September 17, 2013 (2:09 pm)

    Audios McShwinn!!

  • Cause Haun September 17, 2013 (2:21 pm)

    Ugh – the only thing I learned from attending is that they both know how to skew facts to make the other candidate look bad while offering no insight on their own strengths. Children, the both of them. A sad state of affairs that our local city debates have degenerated into this. Feeling naive that I expected better.

  • alki forever September 17, 2013 (3:21 pm)

    Cause…. We are screwed whoever we vote for.That’s how its set up here..

  • Seattlite September 17, 2013 (3:33 pm)

    Jcbbb and Cause Haun — I agree w/your comments. Seattle is so blue that it cannot see “the forest for the trees.” These past years Mayor after Mayor has done more harm than good for our beautiful Emerald City. I cannot vote for either candidate with a good conscience. Murray will just bring the same ol progressive liberal gibe that causes divisiveness. Seattle’s city planners have destroyed our urban neighborhoods with overdevelopment and no new infrastructure. McShwinn’s goal is to make driving as inconvenient as possible — bike lanes, new development with no parking availability and on and on…

  • anonyme September 17, 2013 (3:38 pm)


    No winners here.

  • West Side!! September 17, 2013 (4:20 pm)

    I wish we weren’t stuck with these two but…here we are! Of the two, I have to go with Murray! McGinn DOES NOT work with others! Well, unless you want to talk about bike lanes. Regarding education, he keeps talking about early pre-school but what about the Seattle School District K-12 right now? Nothing! It’s the worst in the state. He talks about Pathways to Careers in the Seattle Community College District. Sounds good but what is that, and what are the outcomes? The majority of the City Council members can’t stand him and don’t even attempt to hide their hate or discontent in public hearings. He can’t even work with his own city’s council! And don’t get me started on all of McGinn’s back room meetings with Chris Hansen way before we started hearing about this new arena. You remember Chris Hansen, that San Francisco hedge fund guy that bought signatures in CA and tried to steal the Kings from Sacramento? The one that bought up a huge portion of property in Seattle’s SODO district and decided along with his buddy, OUR Mayor, that that’s where a third arena should go. Really McGinn? It was never about bringing the NBA back to Seattle was it? All about a real estate deal huh? And when he say’s he’s working with the Port to mitigate traffic impacts, I wonder how the idea of a third arena at the Port’s doorstep was received? Hmm. I’m giving Murray a chance. McGinn had his!

  • GoGo September 17, 2013 (4:23 pm)

    So what do we do? Just not vote for either one? I know I’m not voting for McShwinn, that’s for sure.

  • rw September 17, 2013 (4:24 pm)

    I expect exaggeration and misdirection during debates and political campaigns, but McGuinn comes across as a particularly divisive and disingenuous campaigner. And then there is his record over the last few years. Geesh. Spare us from four more years.

  • DTK September 17, 2013 (4:38 pm)

    Isn’t there a door number three?

  • West Seattle Hipster September 17, 2013 (4:41 pm)

    I would have liked to attend, but the 1:00pm start time was peculiar.

    I am a lifelong Democrat and I consider McGinn to be the worst mayor in my lifetime. His actions as mayor have been bizarre and I feel the city as a whole has gone backwards under his “leadership”.

  • Mr. Bradley September 17, 2013 (4:48 pm)

    The comments here seem out of touch with reality.
    McGinn likes bikes. Sure. He actually rides one to work every day. One less car!

    He’s also been running the city for the last four years, have you noticed?
    – There are 30 construction projects going on downtown currently representing 2.8 billion in investments.
    – Unemployment in Seattle is about 4.7% – a few points lower than the state average.
    – The city is booming with business and development. Go down to SLU during the day and see for yourself.
    – the Mayor’s budgets have filled up the rainy day fun
    depleted by the city council in 2008
    – led the fight to double the Families and Education levy
    _ accelerated transit planning for light rail to reach Ballard
    – pledged to fully fund the bicycle master plan
    – partnered with Police to launch Law Enforcement Assisted diversion
    in Response to DOJ
    – created citizen police commission
    – defied police union by committing to a binding legal settlement instead of fighting it in court
    – adjusted the settlement agreement to limit onerous obligations for police managers.

    McGinn’s accomplishments demonstrate collaboration with lawmakers, regional agencies, business, and activists. The claims that he can’t get anything done don’t ring true. He should be allowed to finish this work that he started.

  • West Seattle Hipster September 17, 2013 (4:56 pm)

    “We’ve gotten a lot done … leading the nation in jobs … innovative new programs to hire local workers … doubled the Families and Education Levy … all of our libraries open on Sundays … rebuilding the Rainy Day Fund … and none of those things happened all by themselves …



    Yes, they did not happen by themselves, you can thank the taxpayers for those achievements.

  • alki forever September 17, 2013 (6:26 pm)

    How come it took a stabbing death after a Sounders game last week to grab the attention of McGinn to understand how serious the mental crisis issue is in and around Seattle? I forgot, its election time. Wooot!! The guy who shot the Metro bus driver was also mentally ill. Same with the Café Racer shooter in Capitol Hill. Priortize McGinn Prioritize!! Don’t be wasting $500,000 dollars on a stupid bike study or Nickelsville…lordy!! That money can go to help keep mentally illed people safe from us and themselves. It may take more than that, but its a start. But don’t worry McSwhinn don’t bother because we’ll see you in the unemployment line.

  • Tucker September 17, 2013 (6:40 pm)

    Thank you, Mr. Bradley. And while some of that work was started under, of all people, Greg Nickels, McGinn didn’t drop the ball. Yes, he has a brash personality that clashes with a number of people, but he’s also learned to temper that over his 4 years in office to get better cooperation. The council might not like him, but it’s silly to deny that they guy’s gotten quite a bit done.

  • Seattlite September 17, 2013 (7:24 pm)

    Does anyone have a list of Murray’s decisions and accomplishments? I couldn’t find a pro and con article re his political career online.

  • fiz September 17, 2013 (8:02 pm)

    For the first time in fifty years I might not vote.

  • Spec Op September 17, 2013 (8:11 pm)

    Seattle has a libertarian streak every blue moon – hopefully it exposes itself again sometime soon, and we find/elect a mayoral proponent of small govt/fiscal responsibility.

    I’m glad to see McGinn polling in the 30% range, and Murray polling in the 50’s. Murray will only be marginally better, but at least it won’t be McGinn again – even though McGinn IS a ‘nice guy’.

  • JoB September 17, 2013 (9:49 pm)

    and we expect Murray to be better because ????
    because we are impressed with how well our state legislature handled transportation or funding for programs for the mentally ill? Not.
    because we are impressed with the cutbacks to funding for housing for the people who end up in places like Nickelsville? Not?
    it’s all well and good to work together..
    but wouldn’t it be better to actually get something done?

  • WTF September 17, 2013 (10:58 pm)

    Why can’t this city grow-up? Choose a mayor worth voting for. I too, will not vote. What’s the point?

  • alki forever September 18, 2013 (8:30 am)

    WTF…It would be an injustice to not vote. First off, you will be relinquishing your right to vote, second, that’s what those politicians want you to do is not to vote, so, it gives them an excuse to get away with more shenanigans.

  • Ex-Westwood Resident September 18, 2013 (10:49 am)

    McGinn likes bikes. Sure. He actually rides one to work every day. One less car!
    NO HE DOES NOT!!! He has his driver pick him up with his bike, then he gets dropped off few blocks from City Hall, then rides the rest of the way (all downhill I might add). The few times I have attended events where he was present, I saw his bike there, him with his helmet in hand, but dressed in a suit. After the first one I purposely hung around to see if he actually rode the bike. He didn’t. A city van was there and after 99% of the people left, they loaded it in the van and McGinn left in a car.
    Murray isn’t much better…I wonder if anyone bothered to ask him how he felt about the Fourth Amendment? See he has sponsored bills that would have given County Sheriffs the RIGHT to enter and inspect/search homes, no less than annually, WITHOUT a search warrant. Then when called on it this year, he claimed that he didn’t read the bill that close. Then it was discovered that he sponsored/submitted two other bills WITH THE SAME EXACT WORDING in the past, he admitted that he, nor anyone in his staff wrote the bills, but a lobbyist group had written them and gave them to him for submission to the Legislature.
    Both of these Jackholes are lying, pandering PoS progressive liberals.
    I feel sorry for the city that was once voted as the “Most Livable City in America” that the choice who leads the city for the next four years is between these two!!!

  • I thought McGinn won September 18, 2013 (11:28 am)

    I thought the debate was pretty good, but McGinn was the clear victor. He was sharp and articulate.

    Yes, McGinn has an agenda that many here seem to disagree with, but after listening to Murray for the hour I heard little vision for the future. Maybe he got flustered with debate tactics, but he’s been doing this for a while. He needs to be better at defending his ideas and presenting his case in public. I really can’t tell where he wants to go on transportation, public safety, etc.

    I like McGinn’s plan to expand Metro, to backfill lack of state funding for local priorities such as universal pre-school and more public transportation. I support his efforts to address living wages in the city. I get that people love their cars, but density is the future and we need forward looking perspectives. Even if it’s unpopular to put them out there.

    I wonder how many people here disagree with Murray’s poorly articulated vision?

    Murray needs to do more than talk about his experience in Olympia. It’s an admirable resume, but it feels a little like he thinks he’s entitled to be mayor. I want to vote for him because of his policy stances, not his track record.

    I also think the criticisms of McGinn are legit. I found his answer that “I was not very good at being mayor at first, but I got better…” to be accurate. Seems like he’s got his groove on and the “can’t work with others” claim is a little hollow these days.

  • Diane September 18, 2013 (1:28 pm)

    well for all of you who choose to NOT vote; gives all the more power to my vote
    I was completely undecided, until 3 days before the primary, mostly because I knew too much, having attended more than a dozen debates, and watching more on seattlechannel; wasn’t thrilled with any of them
    since the primary, I’ve heard Murray speak a lot in detail about his plans for Seattle, which is very encouraging; if you really want to know, there’s a lot of info on his website; as he stated yesterday, it’s hard to share all his ideas for the future of Seattle in 1-2 min answers (which is the limit at most debates); and if you attend, there’s usually an opportunity to talk to each of them personally, before or after; they stayed after for questions for a while yesterday
    attending multiple debates yields more info; I attended 2 yesterday; 1st at the senior center; last night at the human service sponsored forum at Garfield CC; last week at Belltown CC; some of what they talk about each time is repeated; much is focused to the audience; last night, both Murray and McGinn answers were very different than at the senior center
    and/or show up at “coffee chats”; there was one for McGinn in WS, 3 days before the primary; and I was the only person to show up (who wasn’t part of his campaign, or a reporter); so I had rare and unexpected opportunity for hour long chat with McGinn, asking him all my top questions (about living wage jobs, affordable housing, getting more buses for West Seattle, getting more police downtown); most of his answers about what he will do in future were very evasive, and kept repeating top lines of what he has done; some of his comments, “not going to make any promises” and “if I say something, my opponents will attack me” and “sorry, just being honest”
    at the Senior center debate yesterday, I especially liked Murray’s focus on what he will do to help seniors, and pointing out cuts made by current leadership to senior services; that he will reinstate much needed funding for senior services; seniors are often left out of nearly every discussion; we are the fastest growing population, and matter a lot
    re living wages; most striking to me at a debate downtown this summer at the Showbox; in a multiple choice of 3 possible answers, neither McGinn or Murray knew what our Washington State minimum wage is ($9.19); I asked McGinn about that during our chat; he replied “I was close”; well, there was a 1 in 3 chance of getting it correct; and don’t you think our leaders should know the min wage (poverty wages that a majority of voters are struggling to live on, while rents keep climbing)

  • pjmanley September 18, 2013 (2:00 pm)

    How many miles of road lanes has McGinn taken off the grid in the last 4 years in favor of bike lanes for the 6% who commute that way? McGinn’s transportation plans are straight out of Lynnwood. Buh-bye Mikey.

  • An September 18, 2013 (2:05 pm)

    Bye McGinn and gods riddance!

  • cj September 18, 2013 (5:09 pm)

    I like McGinn and while I considered the other guy cause he said all the right things, once I found he was palm rubbing friendly up with the same companies that Nickles was so supportive of it was all over. My gut kind of told me he sounded too good to be true. Sure he might win, but I have to vote with my conscience and not go along with people making big rude noises.

  • JN September 18, 2013 (9:03 pm)

    @pjmanley, in all of Seattle? 0%.

  • pjmanley September 19, 2013 (7:40 am)

    So, @JN, removing an entire lane of traffic on numerous arterials to replace them with bike lanes has no effect on road capacity? Really? 0%? Nonsense.

  • JN September 19, 2013 (9:04 am)

    @pjmanley, if what you’re saying is even true (name those changes, please!), and despite the fact that those changes did not measurably affect traffic capacity or travel time, but significantly improved safety for ALL street users, given the number of miles of roadway in the city limits, yes, statistically I stand by my assessment of 0%. Fine, I’ll give you .0001%, though that’s being generous.

  • Ex-Westwood Resident September 19, 2013 (10:57 am)

    JN – Here is one…
    Faunleroy Way from California to Alaska.
    Used to be two lanes ion each direction. Now is one lane in each direction with a usless left-turn lane, one baike lane and a “sharrow” marked lane.
    By my math that is two miles of road capaity removed for the benefit of >4% of commuters.
    Add in Denny Way, and few roads in Ballard and the miles start adding up.

  • JN September 19, 2013 (2:23 pm)

    Ex-Westwood, and do you realize that that particular road diet not only improved safety, but also did not affect traffic time or volume? And again, city wide the percentage of actual bicycle facilities (sharrows FO NOT COUNT) is still significantly under 1% which, BTW, is itself way less then the percentage of bicyclists. So bicyclists are still getting much less then their numbers warrant. And of course, is the safety of people walking and using bicycles so insignificant to you that you consider motor vehicle speed more important? Jeez, that’s a pretty messed up point of view to have.

  • Tuesday September 19, 2013 (5:57 pm)

    It never ceases to amaze me how people think simply raising wages will make people more wealthy. You know that when wages are higher things cost more right? I mean, why not just raise the minimum wage to $1,000/ hr? Oh yeah, employers couldn’t afford to pay that wage without COMPLETELY pricing themselves out of the market and going out of business. Or we could take it down to a more “reasonable” $25/hr. I’m sure that wouldn’t affect prices at all. That’s the problem with forced “livable” wages. It’s a pie in the sky idea that people so desperately wish would work that now they have somehow deluded themselves into believing is true.

Sorry, comment time is over.