This article talks a great game. Then we get to the third to last question:<p>> <i>The other argument they like to use is that if we actually had to pay these workers a wage the industry would collapse, the system would fail, many jobs would be lost, and prices would skyrocket. But here's the thing: that all has been proven to be completely false by the seven states that have completely eliminated this system. They have higher restaurant sales per capita, higher job growth in the restaurant industry, higher job growth among tipped workers, and even higher rates of tipping than the others.</i><p>Oh, hm? I didn't know some states had actually eliminated tipping! Well, I've been keeping my head down and maybe I'm just out of the loop. I'm going to have to look this up.<p>> <i>Our concern, and why we would never want to legislate that or push for a complete elimination of tipping, is that we don’t think that the employer will do it in the way people like Danny Meyer have done it</i><p>Oh, what? But you just spent the rest of the article talking about how bad tipping is? Well there must be some synthesis here.<p>>> So kind of like how many other industries that have adopted tipping function. Like, say, coffee shops, where baristas are paid a salary at or above the minimum, and also tipped from time to time?<p>> Thats exactly right.<p>oof. So uh, despite an entire article talking about what a bad system tipping is, we're not actually talking about eliminating tipping? But instead embracing the dynamic of even more types of businesses nagging each customer for an extra donation instead of directly paying their workers competitively? Which continues enabling most of the poor dynamics the article was just bemoaning?<p>I get that the two-tiered minimum wage is horrible, and if this article was up front with that framing I wouldn't have felt so cheated. But as it stands, with friends like these...