Why do you insist on being so disingenuous? Tax cuts have nothing to do with “flat lining paychecks”. You also use “Trickle-downers” or some form of it in every. single. article. you write up.
You talk about inflation but don’t mention where a doubling of the minimum wage would send it (Fed policy after the great recession didn’t lead to inflation in consumer good because 99% of the money went to the rich; take a look at equities, real estate etc to see inflation in action). You don’t mention what happens to people on fixed incomes, who can’t work, or are retired as a result of the inflation that will occur as a result of doubling the wage floor. You don’t discuss what happens to upper-middle class wage earners, who are already treading water due to debt payments and over extension in the face of inflation.
“It worked out great for Seattle!” — You insist on cherry picking data and studies to support your view. Most studies actually point out a reduction is total pay as a result of the increase because of decreasing hours. Coupled with the fact that Seattle isn’t Alabama, and that microcosm of “success” as you see it tells us NOTHING about how it impacts far less diverse labor markets.
It’s hard to overstate how high a $15 wage floor would be. Consider that over half of all workers in Mississippi and Arkansas make less than $15 per hour. Twenty states have a median wage of less than $17 per hour. At the national level, around one-third of workers earn less than $15 per hour.
If you believe that $15 would be wonderful in these areas, then you should be making the argument for $50, because if wage increases are good for the economy, then why $15? Why stop there? The fact is, you don’t know.
You don’t mention ANY of the details that actually matter in this discussion. You never do. It’s all class warfare and vilification. Frankly, it’s embarrassing.