Skip to main content

The New York Times:
Much of the discussion about the Democratic proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour by 2016 has rightly focused on the workers who will clearly benefit from the move. But what about businesses? How would higher wages affect them?

The answer — contrary to a great deal of reflexive hand-wringing by some conservative think tanks and politicians — is surprisingly positive. Scholarly studies and the experience of businesses themselves show that what companies lose when they pay more is often offset by lower turnover and increased productivity. Businesses are also able to deal with higher costs by modestly increasing prices and by giving smaller increases to higher-paid employees.

The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, says he expects to bring a minimum-wage increase proposal to the floor of the Senate for a vote in late March or early April. When he does, politicians from both parties need to put aside old canards and instead focus on research that suggests that a higher minimum wage has a powerful upside

Teresa Tritch at the NYT calls out those who would oppose such an increase:
This week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decided to postpone a vote on raising the minimum wage, in part, it appears, because he does not have enough Democratic support to pass the measure. The holdouts include several Democratic senators from low-wage and mostly southern states who are up for reelection this year. That is pathetic.

A higher minimum wage is a basic response to the low and stagnating wages that have long afflicted most Americans. It is not a cure-all, it is not new or visionary. It is a time-tested step in the direction of higher living standards, broader prosperity and a more stable economy.

If it is difficult to corral even Democrats in favor of what is by all measures a modest increase — from $7.25 an hour, its level since 2009, to $10.10 an hour by 2016 — what chance is there going forward for innovative and comprehensive policies and programs to address the nation’s economic challenges?

More on the day's top stories below the fold.

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson examines President Obama's latest proposal:

“My Brother’s Keeper” has a much nicer ring than “stop and frisk.” It also promises to be a more effective, less self-defeating way to address the interlocking social and economic crises afflicting young men of color.

I’ll go out on a limb and predict that President Obama gets some heat for launching a program whose benefits are aimed solely at African American and Hispanic men and boys. The nation’s first black president gets slammed by critics who accuse him of “playing the race card” every time he acknowledges that race and racism still play a role in determining opportunities and outcomes.

But obviously they do. My Brother’s Keeper, which Obama announced Thursday, is the kind of targeted public-private initiative that might actually do some good, even without tons of new federal money thrown in.

Meanwhile, Jay Bookman at the AJC looks at the Republican attacks against the Affordable Care Act:
Just 31 percent of Americans want the law repealed outright or repealed and replaced, which is the foundation of the Republican campaign. Fifty-six percent want the law kept in place, with most of that majority recognizing the need for improvement in how it is implemented.

Among Republicans, of course, the law is despised. But the contrast between that sentiment and those of the population at large is stunning. Among independents, where most swing votes reside, the sentiment reflects that of the general populace: 57 percent in favor of keeping the law and improving upon it, with only 33 percent in favor of repeal.
To put it mildly, that is not the kind of public attitude that can sustain a single-issue, year-long political campaign.

Pat Garofalo analyzes the veto of Arizona's discrimination bill:
The bill was just the latest piece of anti-gay legislation to run aground. Kansas’ state house, for instance, passed a similar measure recently, only to see it stymied in the state senate. Another copycat bill in Tennessee has also been shelved. In a slew of states, conservatives are trying to find a way to advance anti-gay laws under the guise of religious freedom, but they’re not meeting with much success.

In many ways, this desperate attempt to formally legalize discrimination is the last gasp of a point of view headed towards extinction, and it’s really no surprise that it’s failing to gain traction. Case in point, according to new data from the Public Religion Research Institute, support for same-sex relationships is skyrocketing and is only going to grow more as the millennial generation (of which I am a member) ages.

Dorothy J. Samuels at The New York Times adds her take on the topic:
Most of the attention went to Gov. Jan Brewer’s veto on Wednesday of a Republican-sponsored bill that would have given business owners broad license to discriminate against gay men, lesbians and others, based on far-fetched claims of religious infringement.

But that welcome bow to fairness — and, not incidentally, loud objections from the state’s business community — should not obscure the well-deserved burial two days earlier of another terrible idea from Republican state lawmakers: A 2012 bill to de-fund Planned Parenthood that Governor Brewer not only signed but championed all the way to the Supreme Court.

This other atrocious measure would have punished thousands of low-income women by stopping Medicaid reimbursements to Planned Parenthood clinics, other facilities and individual doctors that offer a range of women’s health care services — including family planning, STD treatment and cancer screenings — because they also provide abortion care using other money.

Finally, Donna Brazille on why she's a Democrat:
In her 1976 keynote address to the Democratic National Committee, Texas Rep. Barbara Jordan said words I will never forget:

"We believe that the people are the source of all governmental power; that the authority of the people is to be extended, not restricted. This can be accomplished only by providing each citizen with every opportunity to participate in the management of the government.

"We believe that the government which represents the authority of all the people, not just one interest group, but all the people, has an obligation to actively seek to remove those obstacles which would block individual achievement -- obstacles emanating from race, sex, economic condition."

That explains why I am a Democrat.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  we have a nice 'get out of town' story (20+ / 0-)

    from TPM yesterday, and there ya go.

    TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes? -- Addington's Perpwalk.

    by greenbird on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 04:37:04 AM PST

  •  Obama invited BAM (Becoming a Man), (26+ / 0-)

    a youth guidance program, participants to the White House to help kick off the My Brother's Keeper initiative:

    The group had been in the Oval Office the previous Father's Day: Obama embraces a lifelong cuase: Helping minority boys succeed

    As the teens gathered around the president, one handed him a green and gold Father’s Day card, which all the boys had signed. They had gone out and purchased it the day before, unbeknown to their counselor, Marshaun Bacon, who traveled with them to the White House.

    “I never signed a Father’s Day card before,” the young man explained as the president opened the card. “I’ve never signed a Father’s Day card, either,” Obama replied, according to an aide, improbably closing the distance between the Chicago teens and the American president. It was an intimate, private moment that moved him.

    As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them. John F. Kennedy

    by JaxDem on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 04:50:00 AM PST

  •  If you can't afford to pay a living wage (22+ / 0-)

    you can't afford to have employees.  If we aren't willing to pay $.20 more for our burgers, we shouldn't be buying them.

    If the Republicans ever find out that Barack Obama favors respiration, we'll be a one-party system inside two minutes. - Alan Lewis

    by MadRuth on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 04:53:08 AM PST

    •  Low wages is bad business. (10+ / 0-)

      The cost of turn-over, re-training and reduced individual commitment to a position surely out-weighs paying low wages. This is management by foolishness. Unless, of course, it's part of a Walmart style business plan that uses government programs and emergency rooms (for healthcare) to subsidize their workforce. That's unethical management by greed.

      "One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, sourpusses." ― Pope Francis

      by GoodGod on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:32:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I would like to belive that any decent small (9+ / 0-)

        business owner already knows this is true and provides at least raises and benefits that are fair: even if they are not very generous.

        I ran a small business and also worked for large corporations.
        It was easy for the corporations to be stingy because they had a long line of people who would jump at the chance to  get a job there. But they did not pay minimum wages to any of their employees even at lower level jobs.

        In my small business it was critical to keep the same personnel as long as possible because replacing them with people who were equally talented was time consuming, counter-productive and I lost valuable time if I had to do it. So I was more than fair, I was generous with pay and benefits. My personnel didn't change for 13 years and we all did well: yes I could have been less fair, but what would have been the point if I had to replace people every year?

        •  Fully Agreed! (4+ / 0-)

          I speak from experience. I own 2 (very small) businesses. We pay employees well, good benefits, treat them well. Turnover is very rare over the 15+ years I've had each, and that's of great value to both companies.

          I used to work in a small (~100 employee) business that was purchased by a large corporation that applied cost-cutting techniques. Almost everyone jumped ship, and some of us started alternative companies.

          "One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, sourpusses." ― Pope Francis

          by GoodGod on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:28:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Also, too (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            foresterbob, papercut, a gilas girl

            Employers who whine about a supposed 1% increase in the cost of doing business http://money.cnn.com/...
            because of Obamacare should not be in business. The money quote (pun intended) from this article:

            "The costs associated with ACA compliance could ultimately close our doors," the sign reads. "Instead of raising prices on our products to generate the additional revenue needed to cover the costs of ACA compliance, certain Gator's Dockside locations have implemented a 1% surcharge on all food and beverage purchases only."

            If the Republicans ever find out that Barack Obama favors respiration, we'll be a one-party system inside two minutes. - Alan Lewis

            by MadRuth on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:59:30 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  this is the real issue (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pelagicray

        If businesses, the business lobby, business writers and the public would learn to look beyond the short term profit line to understand things systemically (and to think about investments in terms of something other than the quarterly stock market report) we'd be so much better off.

        While greed plays a major role that isn't the only contributing factor, for an entire generation forces have been at work remaking the way we think about investment, systems, problems, issues and solutions to the point that we only look superficially at everything and problem solve in the most destructive of fashions.

        Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

        by a gilas girl on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 07:38:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, ignorance, short sightedness, and propaganda (0+ / 0-)

          have most definitely cut across the board enabling the "problem solve in the most destructive of fashions" culture.

          On a personal level I note how over my adult lifetime spanning over fifty years the number of businesses and institutions that I deal with in confidence of efficiency and just simple competence has fallen to the point I now expect to run into anything from difficulty to downright idiocy.

          Retail is a cesspool of that and a number of companies I once thought highly of are off my list or "crap, they are closest" category now. One of my pet peeves is the way gimmicks have apparently replaced solid customer service in the minds of so many in retail as the way to do business successfully. Small businesses get one shot with me. The big ones manage to find enough customers willing to put up with such foolishness or dominate the area and market enough so that I have to occasionally deal with them they even get some business from me.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 08:05:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It starts at the top (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pelagicray

            Executives are just in it until their next gig arrives, and middle mangers copy that attitude to the point where they say, "Who cares who I hire? I might get promoted tomorrow!"

            I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

            by CFAmick on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 09:02:20 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There lies most of the problem. (0+ / 0-)

              It is an old phenomenon but it is interesting, particularly in retail, how great old companies founded by real marketing minds, locally Woodward & Lothrop and Giant Food (people in the D.C. area still talk nostalgically about that place and Giant is still around in name—not in choice or customer service), are wrecked by the next generation. Nothing was like Giant for many of us. Such loyalty that major national chains didn't even bother to really compete. One of the first to go "consumer advocate" (hired Esther Peterson as advocate) and pioneered hiring inner city, ghetto residents for its stores. As a result:

              Although the company had been criticized for bypassing predominantly black neighborhoods, by the mid-1960s Giant did begin to open stores in the inner city. In the rioting that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., in 1968, store managers and black employees faced down angry mobs at Giant stores, and the chain escaped much of the looting and damage of the period.

              Woodies is gone and Giant is on my list only because it is a few minutes away and has some good specials. I do more grocery shopping now in big Asian markets than Giant.

              The conglomeration madness that started back in the seventies particularly ruined company after company. Current management indeed seems "get mine and go" or just plain idiots. I remember an article about 40 years ago in a professional naval magazine about the problem of a cereal company that had exploded into conglomeration taking over the company noted for building destroyers (if I recall) and the new management not understanding why they needed to keep some old codgers around. It was not long after that lots of the ships coming out were crap.

              The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

              by pelagicray on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 10:26:25 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Unfortunately Mr Bookman.......Obamacare is one of (6+ / 0-)

    the pillars of GOP unity....that and.....BENGHAZEEEE!!!

  •  Keep that quiet, Jay Bookman! (7+ / 0-)

    The republicans think they'll win the Senate this November primarily based on the emotional distaste out there for Obamacare. Yeah, all 33% who feel that way. But, via transference, they assume their blind emotion is held by everyone else. As long as the democratic candidates themselves aren't duped by Faux News, et al., and by the nasty e-mails that they get from the 33% (who certainly won't vote for them anyway), let's just let the right live their fantasy until they get their rude awakening in November.

    And as to Benghazi....

    "One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, sourpusses." ― Pope Francis

    by GoodGod on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:08:52 AM PST

    •  The Republicans WILL win the Senate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a gilas girl

        But it won't have anything to do with Obamacare.

        It will have everything to do with the still-sluggish economy (thanks in large part to all that bipartisany neoliberalism) and to Democrats like Mark Pryor who project all the strength and principle of a wet dishtowel.  

        The Senate will go to whichever party wants it more. I think we all know the answer to that.

      "Le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge."

      by Buzzer on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:45:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wouldn't be so pessemistic. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Stude Dude

        Pryor is toast, exactly because he acts like milk toast.

        But while I can't agree with the Landry and Begich tactic to distance themselves from the ACA and min wage increases, I think they'll both prevail (although they'd have been stronger if they ran on the positives of O'care and on improving it further and on the business advantages of min wage). In addition, Mitch is going to have a rough time of it in KY: very good chance for a Dem pick-up there.

        Meanwhile, the economy will see a bounce after the cold weather moves on (if ever!), and the Obamacare news will over-all improve over the next 8 months.

        The republicans need to run the board. They won't.

        "One of the more serious temptations which stifles boldness and zeal is a defeatism which turns us into querulous and disillusioned pessimists, sourpusses." ― Pope Francis

        by GoodGod on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:17:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Democrats (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        foresterbob

        have shown a really remarkable ability to win close Senate races in the last 4 election cycles. Even in 2010, the bad year, it was not so bad w/ the Senate races. So maybe they can hang on this year too. Mary Landrieu in LA has done it enough times before, when I thought she was a gonner.

        But right now it does look pretty scary. And not because of the Obamacare semi-fake issue, but just because the recovery has not reached enough ordinary citizens.

        You will not be punished for your anger. You will be punished by your anger.

        by mstep on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:26:16 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Modest increase? (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, SueDe, Inland, asm121, mstep, skohayes

    In actual (not adjusted) dollars, that is not a modest increase. It is more than 39%.

    Is it reasonable? Probably.
    Is it due?  Sure.
    Is it a good thing? Probably.

    Is it modest? No. And isn't that the point?  The minimum wage has degraded badly and it needs more than a modest increase.

    LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

    by dinotrac on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:17:27 AM PST

  •  Local radio wingnut sez...Arizona bill was stupid. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hulibow, skohayes, foresterbob

    If a baker has a problem with a gay marriage he should just lie and say he is busy or something.....and not nail himself to a cross....makes goopers look intolerant....lol

    •  Stewart on this was hilarious (4+ / 0-)

      some politician claiming that a "grocer" shouldn't be forced to bake cakes against his religious convictions, showing a refrigerated case of pre-made frosted sheet cakes. Hey, after 20+ years together we can finally get married - let's stop by the Safeway and pick up wedding cake - as if!

    •  Stupid (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, sillia

      From every perspective it is a stupid law, written by the stupid for the stupid. Any business owner who turns away paying customers in today's economy is already pretty stupid. It really is tempting to cheer for this kind of law, so the bigots can all encourage one another to go out of business.

      You will not be punished for your anger. You will be punished by your anger.

      by mstep on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:31:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But the bigots weren't turning away business (0+ / 0-)

        in Arizona.  1062 did not solve any problem being felt in Arizona - even Jan Brewer said that in her press conference.  As the legislator said when asked why he voted for it, he thought it was going to be a good move politically.  Like voter fraud, these laws are proposed as a solution in search of a problem.

        "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

        by SueDe on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 09:05:55 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Poor People Don't Vote (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, mstep

    And the ones who do love guns more than having enough food.

  •  Thanks for the roundup, Georgia! (10+ / 0-)

    Raising the minimum wage is a winning issue for the Dems. It's a way we can differentiate ourselves from the Rethugs.  People need a reason to vote, so an increase in the minimum wage would be the motivating factor that would drive turnout.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:20:24 AM PST

  •  I find it more than highly annoying (7+ / 0-)

    that Bill O'Reilly is included in the kickoff of My Brother's Keeper and then proceeds to pontificate from his high horse. WTF - he knows nothing of what he is speaking (which is not new) and WHY that moron & his fake news network is ever given a nod from President Obama is beyond me.

    Young men “idolize these guys with the hats on backwards, and the terrible rock — rap lyrics and the drug and all that,” O’Reilly added, urging Jarrett to convince “gansta rappers,” athletes and “tattoo guys,” to go on television and tell those who look up to them to “knock it off” and end their destructive behaviors.

    O’Reilly also told Jarrett he wants the First Lady Michelle Obama to come on to his show and say, “You teenage girls. You stop having sex. You stop getting pregnant.”

    •  I'm told that Billo's picture is hung in every (5+ / 0-)

      black family's living room.....;-)

    •  He's starting to sound like George Will (5+ / 0-)

      Jon Stewart played him starting a rant about legalizing marijuana, that turned into a rant about teens and 73% of them text, so there must be an addiction to texting out there. He sounded just like George Will in my favorite column of all time:

      Long ago, when James Dean and Marlon Brando wore it, denim was, Akst says, "a symbol of youthful defiance." Today, Silicon Valley billionaires are rebels without causes beyond poses, wearing jeans when introducing new products. Akst's summa contra denim is grand as far as it goes, but it only scratches the surface of this blight on Americans' surfaces. Denim is the infantile uniform of a nation in which entertainment frequently features childlike adults ("Seinfeld," "Two and a Half Men") and cartoons for adults ("King of the Hill"). Seventy-five percent of American "gamers" -- people who play video games -- are older than 18 and nevertheless are allowed to vote. In their undifferentiated dress, children and their childish parents become undifferentiated audiences for juvenilized movies (the six -- so far -- "Batman" adventures and "Indiana Jones and the Credit-Default Swaps," coming soon to a cineplex near you). Denim is the clerical vestment for the priesthood of all believers in democracy's catechism of leveling -- thou shalt not dress better than society's most slovenly. To do so would be to commit the sin of lookism -- of believing that appearance matters. That heresy leads to denying the universal appropriateness of everything, and then to the elitist assertion that there is good and bad taste.
      Okay, this is bad, I mean, who hates blue jeans? But the crowning moment of this column (written in 2009) was this paragraph:
      This is not complicated. For men, sartorial good taste can be reduced to one rule: If Fred Astaire would not have worn it, don't wear it. For women, substitute Grace Kelly.
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:41:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Speaking of the Arizona law being vetoed: (9+ / 0-)

    Tammy Bruce over at the Washington Times pens an op-ed explaining how the veto of the law is, once again, further victimizing Christians (who seem to be perpetual victims in their own minds).

    This bill, like others across the country, was thought necessary because of the emergence of business, large and small, being attacked by the gay left for either espousing Christian values or acting on their Christian faith. Ranging from a bakery to a photographer, individuals were being sued for refusing to violate their religious beliefs. Having been a liberal “community organizer” in my past, I immediately recognized the strategy being employed. This is an effort to condition the public into automatically equating faith with bigotry. To make faith in the public square illegal and dangerous, you need legal cases and publicity. Voila, lawsuits against small business resting on the notion that acting on genuinely held faith is bigotry per se.
    This reminds me so much of the cry of lunch counter owners during the civil rights demonstrations 60 years ago - same bigotry, same arguments, same victimhood.  (My not providing a link to the Washington Times was on purpose)

    "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

    by SueDe on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 05:43:43 AM PST

    •  They so fail at this messaging (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, tampaedski, foresterbob, SueDe

      A business that is public has no First Amendment protections.
      You are free to exercise your religion, but not when the public good that provides roads, sewers, electricity, and public parking are helping your business succeed.

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:44:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Barbara Jordan (13+ / 0-)

    Now there is a woman who, if she had run for President, would not only have had my vote, but would have had me thinking about how I could vote twice. She had more presence and more integrity than the entire crowd of politicians today.

  •  CBO on minimum wage (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a gilas girl
    Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.
    http://www.cbo.gov/...
    So, not hard to see why wavering and postponement.
    •  Yes, I can see where that would be troubling. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Stude Dude, reginahny, skohayes

      Especially if that's all you read of the report.  Republicans - and frightened Democrats - tend to pick and choose what is important to them.  Kind of like how they treat the bible.

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." - H. L. Mencken

      by SueDe on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:13:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  They laid more people (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a gilas girl

      off from public jobs (well over a million) through budget cuts, and now, NOW they're worried about 500,000 people that might get laid off?
      It's republicans, doing their typical "Screw the lower classes, how can we get more tax breaks for US?"

      Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

      by skohayes on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:47:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A better way to look at impact (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      hmi

      of higher minimum wage would be against the population of low wage workers (those currently making at or less than the new minimum wage).  This is because the benefit of the increase in concentrated with these workers and the resulting job losses.  

      For illustration purposes consider the case of a total worker population of 100 million, and a total of 1 million people making less than the new minimum.  If all 1 million low wage workers became unemployed, this would be reported as decreasing total employment by 1%,  while it was 100% job loss for those it was intended to help most.  While both descriptions are mathematically true, which is the more useful perspective?

      The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

      by nextstep on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 10:13:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gay bashing and forced birth (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite, a gilas girl

    Are the Dems smart enough to use the GOP obsession with these to GOTV in a tough Mid-Term?

    "If this Studebaker had anymore Atomic Space-Age Style, you'd have to be an astronaut with a geiger counter!"

    by Stude Dude on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:08:44 AM PST

  •  Millennial Generation? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    foresterbob

    I'm guessing that for you there has "always" been home computers and internet. Like there had "always" been TV for my generation. Although, not so much for my parents' and grand-parents' generations.

    "How could you stand growing up backwards without TV back in those days?"

    I have to wonder, and never really know, if things like Pintos look as old and weird to Millennials as those fat and pattoon fendered old cars rusting away in pastures used to look to me.

    "If this Studebaker had anymore Atomic Space-Age Style, you'd have to be an astronaut with a geiger counter!"

    by Stude Dude on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 06:15:38 AM PST

  •  Never thought I'd see this sentence (0+ / 0-)

    written by a mainstream newspaper reporter:

    That is pathetic.
    Congratulations Teresa Tritch for clear and concise punditry.

    Words can sometimes, in moments of grace, attain the quality of deeds. --Elie Wiesel

    by a gilas girl on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 07:26:04 AM PST

  •  A more useful way to understand min wage impact (0+ / 0-)

    The targeted group the min wage increase is meant to help most are workers making less than the new minimum.  The workers at greatest risk of becoming unemployed from the increase are also the same group of people.

    From the CBO report on min wage impact at http://www.cbo.gov/...

    CBO estimates, for the increase to $10.10/hr the job loss is 1 million, and the number of people who will be increased to $10.10/hr is 16.5 million.  So of the people the increase is most targeted to help, about 6% will become unemployed from the increase.  Note that employment has been increasing at a rate of about 2 million/yr.

    The above does not argue for or against the increase, but is a more practical a way to understand the upside of the change vs its downside.

    Most reporting compares the total job loss to the entire workforce even though only a small share of workforce makes less than $10.10/hr.  This gives a far less useful understanding.

    For illustration purposes consider the case of a total worker population of 100 million, and a total of 1 million people making less than the new minimum.  If all 1 million low wage workers became unemployed, this would be reported as decreasing total employment by 1% (does not sound that bad),  while it was 100% job loss for those it was intended to help most (this sounds very bad and not helpful to those intended to help).  While both descriptions are mathematically true, which is the more useful perspective?

    The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

    by nextstep on Fri Feb 28, 2014 at 10:44:48 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site