States With Higher Minimum Wage Gain More Jobs

[AntiParty]

States with higher minimum wage gain more jobs

Many business groups argue that raising the minimum wage discourages job growth by increasing the cost of hiring. A Congressional Budget Office report earlier this year lent some support for that view. It found that a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour, as President Obama supports, could cost 500,000 jobs nationwide.

But the state-by-state hiring data, released Friday by the Labor Department, provides ammunition to those who disagree. Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect. There are many possible reasons hiring might accelerate in a particular state.

People will work if you pay them more. More money means bills are paid, less debt, and more put back into the economy.

Your post is insignificant. People are working now and their wages make them look, statistically, like they aren't.

Ironically, the least educated states can't figure out why their taxes are high and think it's due to Tyranny, due to a specific news source that applies to poor people.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Ironically, the least educated states can't figure out why their taxes are high and think it's due to Tyranny, due to a specific news source that applies to poor people.

You don't have to speak in code on this board, you can write California, it's OK.

 

[Star]

I really don't understand why Rightwingers have no appreciation for demand side economics. If you raised the minimum wage to a reasonable level, you are going to see economic growth. This is economics 101. If wages are higher, people are going to spend more money. Yes, initially it may kill some jobs, but it would regain that number and more with a stimulation to business. The reason why most (not all) CEO's are against raising the wage because it is easier for them to just keep their ridiculous amount of money rather than investing in a stronger labor force that would fair for anyone.

Not only would it kill "some jobs", but it would put a lot of "job providers" out of business.

You want higher wages, stimulate the economy- not Wall Street.

Obama prints about $80 billion per month of paper dollars then dumps them. The value of the dollar is in the shitter, interest rates are near zero, and the only investment refuge is... Wall Street.

NOT Main Street.

God damnit man, get your ass to the *****-Slap thread.

See there's your problem with understanding nuance. Job killing would depend on how high you raised it. If you raised the federal to 10.10, the ONLY businesses that would go under are some tiny mom and pop shops who were never very profitable to begin with. So what? This is about giving people wages they can live off of. Tell me if you had a wage that was less than 10 an hour could you live off of it? What if you had a kid? I know you cons have a deficit with empathy, but just try to imagine it will you?

If it was raised to that much the job loss would be less than 500,000 jobs.

I AM "mom and pop". Two employees (including me), cranking out just under $1 million/year in sales. Very expensive, very thin profit margins. BTW the other employee makes more in wages than do I, the manager.

I've lived with sub-10 wages WITH children. How? Do without. Cut spending to the absolute necessities. And the magic ingredients? Love, patience, and humility.

The three ingredients that you conceited, greedy, hyporcritical Liberal ***** sorely lack.

Well i don't know what you pay your employees but if it means that your business will go under for the sake of the greater good, so be it. People need better wages.

So let me see if you I follow you here. You make less than $10 an hour and you have more than one kid? You don't have a spouse with her own job? Bullshit. There is no way you support yourself and your kids on less than 400 a week without any other assistance.

At one time, yes, that was my situation. Granted, it was a relatively brief period in my life (6 years).

In the meantime...

According to Entrepreneur Magazine there are between 25 million and 27 million small businesses in the U.S. that account for 60 to 80 percent of all U.S. jobs.

Small Businesses Big Impact - Forbes

And your comment reinforces my statement: under the Liberal status quo... the needs of the few far outweigh the needs of the many.

You are living in bizzaro-land. Typical Liberal Obama zombie contorted bullshit.

Small businesses are important to the American economy but-----but some small businesses aren't as small as Republicans and the rightwing scream (MSM) machine try to make out.

Below is a short very incomplete list of businesses considered "small" businesses identified by Keith Olbermann several years ago.

Only dumbassses attack the messenger while ignoring the message.

Kieth Olbermann: Koch Industries Considered “Small Business" by Republicans
Mar 10, 2011

Koch Industries, a conglomerate of partnerships with 70,000 employees.Enterprise Products Partners, L.P., a pipeline company with 2009 revenues of $25 billion.

Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., a Wall Street firm with $445 million in revenue in 2009.

Price Waterhouse Coopers, an accounting firm with $26 billion in revenue in 2009.

The Hillman Company, an investment founded by billionaire philanthropist/industrialist Henry Hillman.

Venn Strategies, Inc., whose chief operating officer is Brian Reardon, a former special assistant to former President George W. Bush.

Ferrellgas, a propane and propane accessories business, with $2 billion in revenues in 2009 and 1 million customers.

CoorsTek, a ceramics manufacturer founded by Adolph Coors, with 2009 revenue of $549 million.
Dead River Co., with $500 million in revenue and 1,200 employees.

McIlhenney Co., the Tabasco maker, with $250 million in revenue in 2007.

Bechtel, the largest construction conglomerate on earth.

The Chicago Tribune, which also owns the LA Times, the largest newspaper in America.

To name just a few.
Rightwingers/Republicans are easily duped, huh?
.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Small businesses are important to the American economy but-----but some small businesses aren't as small as Republicans and the rightwing scream (MSM) machine try to make out.

Below is a short very incomplete list of businesses considered "small" businesses identified by Keith Olbermann several years ago.

.

You left out the most important part, the answer to the question of "So what?"

Who cares? So what? Why is that important in your mind?

 

[Mr. H.]

Small businesses are important to the American economy but-----but some small businesses aren't as small as Republicans and the rightwing scream (MSM) machine try to make out.

Below is a short very incomplete list of businesses considered "small" businesses identified by Keith Olbermann several years ago.

.

You left out the most important part, the answer to the question of "So what?"

Who cares? So what? Why is that important in your mind?

Star has a mind? News to me.

 

[Iceweasel]

To name just a few.
Rightwingers/Republicans are easily duped, huh?

OK, support your assertions then. I weeded through numerous links to get to Oberman's comment:

“It’s not the income that’s small, it’s not the number of employees that’s small, it’s just the total number of owners that’s small,” Olbermann said.

Where exactly is this classification of small vs. large by S/C/LLC structures and explain how this is the brain child of Republicans. And explain why it still exists.

No, I won't hold my breath waiting, you are just another left nut.

 

[boilermaker55]

Only in your mind but you did not post any evidence to back your opinion.
So who got ***** slapped!! YOU

But do you recognize cause and effect?

The effective minimum wage in oil-and-gas boomtowns is quite high, and not because it was mandated.

Sure. Mandates cause economic chaos. Economic activity effects positively on the job market.

Report to the *****-Slap thread, *****.

 

[Plasmaball]

Also from the article,


Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect. There are many possible reasons hiring might accelerate in a particular state.

Yeah I saw that but I take this and what's going on in Washington as signs that you are not loosing jobs..

Like I've said. Everyone whines about inflation till it comes to wages.

I take it to mean they really don't know what the impact is. The impact of rising the minimum wage nationally will vary from state some positive some negative.

There are always those cases that are bad as well as good. Nothing is ever perfect

 

[Plasmaball]

States with higher minimum wage gain more jobs

Many business groups argue that raising the minimum wage discourages job growth by increasing the cost of hiring. A Congressional Budget Office report earlier this year lent some support for that view. It found that a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour, as President Obama supports, could cost 500,000 jobs nationwide.

But the state-by-state hiring data, released Friday by the Labor Department, provides ammunition to those who disagree. Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect. There are many possible reasons hiring might accelerate in a particular state.

People will work if you pay them more. More money means bills are paid, less debt, and more put back into the economy.

LMAO you're conclusion is all wrong, go peddle your socialism on some street corner with a bullhorn.

sure socialism...

 

[Plasmaball]

I live here, and there are reports already of side benefits falling to the way side, and jobs are not being filled as people leave.

Look up whats happening to Sea-Tac, there are reports of this $15/hour thing NOT WORKING. Who wants to do more work as jobs are lost by attrition? Who wants to lose side benefits because that money is now being funneled to your pay check? People there are not happy about "the raise".

what?
SeaTac is proving trickle-down economics wrong MSNBC

 

[Star]

Small businesses are important to the American economy but-----but some small businesses aren't as small as Republicans and the rightwing scream (MSM) machine try to make out.

Below is a short very incomplete list of businesses considered "small" businesses identified by Keith Olbermann several years ago.

.

You left out the most important part, the answer to the question of "So what?"

Who cares? So what? Why is that important in your mind?

Who cares? Obviously Republicans on this M/B do.

The Republicans on this M/B have a myriad of cognitive impairments or maybe decline is the better term. It was a rightwinger/Republican that first contrasted mom and pop shops with large corporation on this thread. And another actually went so far as to say something like s/he is, him/herself and one employee mom & pop. I'm informing the easily duped, i.e. Republicans/rightwingers, mom & pop businesses are only part of the small business equation.

What's an S-Corp? Bartell's is a western WA pharmacy chain, 29 stores, 1,700 employees - Republicans identify Bartell's as a mom & pop shop/small business.
Learn more about S-Corps here.
.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Small businesses are important to the American economy but-----but some small businesses aren't as small as Republicans and the rightwing scream (MSM) machine try to make out.

Below is a short very incomplete list of businesses considered "small" businesses identified by Keith Olbermann several years ago.

.

You left out the most important part, the answer to the question of "So what?"

Who cares? So what? Why is that important in your mind?

Who cares? Obviously Republicans on this M/B do.

The Republicans on this M/B have a myriad of cognitive impairments or maybe decline is the better term. It was a rightwinger/Republican that first contrasted mom and pop shops with large corporation on this thread. And another actually went so far as to say something like s/he is, him/herself and one employee mom & pop. I'm informing the easily duped, i.e. Republicans/rightwingers, mom & pop businesses are only part of the small business equation.

What's an S-Corp? Bartell's is a western WA pharmacy chain, 29 stores, 1,700 employees - Republicans identify Bartell's as a mom & pop shop/small business.
Learn more about S-Corps here.
.

So your fury is driven by nothing more than envy. Why didn't you just say so in the first place. That was the point of Olbermann's rant too, right? Just a big list and no explanation of why this is troublesome.

 

[Camarozz]

I live here, and there are reports already of side benefits falling to the way side, and jobs are not being filled as people leave.

Look up whats happening to Sea-Tac, there are reports of this $15/hour thing NOT WORKING. Who wants to do more work as jobs are lost by attrition? Who wants to lose side benefits because that money is now being funneled to your pay check? People there are not happy about "the raise".

what?
SeaTac is proving trickle-down economics wrong MSNBC

So double the work and less side benefits is ok with you... Sometimes people miss it when they actually have it pretty good.

$15/hr sounds fine and all, but what is going to give for that to happen?

No new employees, higher prices, cheaper product... Yeah, gotta love progress that actually makes things worse. As it is i no longer frequent fast food places very often, the food has gotten horrid, and sure as hell wont go if prices raise any more.

 

[Mathbud1]

I live here, and there are reports already of side benefits falling to the way side, and jobs are not being filled as people leave.

Look up whats happening to Sea-Tac, there are reports of this $15/hour thing NOT WORKING. Who wants to do more work as jobs are lost by attrition? Who wants to lose side benefits because that money is now being funneled to your pay check? People there are not happy about "the raise".

what?
SeaTac is proving trickle-down economics wrong MSNBC

In fairness, SeaTac is a small community and the number of affected workers is quite modest, making this a difficult test case.

Does this sound like it's really proving anything?

 

[Plasmaball]

I live here, and there are reports already of side benefits falling to the way side, and jobs are not being filled as people leave.

Look up whats happening to Sea-Tac, there are reports of this $15/hour thing NOT WORKING. Who wants to do more work as jobs are lost by attrition? Who wants to lose side benefits because that money is now being funneled to your pay check? People there are not happy about "the raise".

what?
SeaTac is proving trickle-down economics wrong MSNBC

So double the work and less side benefits is ok with you... Sometimes people miss it when they actually have it pretty good.

$15/hr sounds fine and all, but what is going to give for that to happen?

No new employees, higher prices, cheaper product... Yeah, gotta love progress that actually makes things worse. As it is i no longer frequent fast food places very often, the food has gotten horrid, and sure as hell wont go if prices raise any more.

i see you just skipped over what i said...Okie dokie

 

[percysunshine]

.

From the link:

"Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect."

Sounds kind of wishy-washy to me. Back peddling and ass covering.

Why can't liberal economists ever take a position on anything?

.

 

[Chris]

70% of the American economy is consumer demand.

Trickle down doesn't work.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

States with higher minimum wage gain more jobs

Many business groups argue that raising the minimum wage discourages job growth by increasing the cost of hiring. A Congressional Budget Office report earlier this year lent some support for that view. It found that a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour, as President Obama supports, could cost 500,000 jobs nationwide.

But the state-by-state hiring data, released Friday by the Labor Department, provides ammunition to those who disagree. Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect. There are many possible reasons hiring might accelerate in a particular state.

People will work if you pay them more. More money means bills are paid, less debt, and more put back into the economy.

RWs prefer that people be on welfare.

Better yet, let them starve.

Based on the RWs posts on this board, I'd say their philosophy exemplifies the "let them eat cake' concept.

Pretty sure you don't understand history let alone the nuances of qoutes from the time.

"Let them eat cake" was a totalitarian government structure that was taking other people's earnings in order that they themselves never had to eat cake but thought that was good enough for everyone else.

The cake was welfare you two simple minded idiot's. It was deemed good enough for the peasantry by the holder's of power. Indeed it was good enough and more than should be expected from the democratic party...I'm sorry I jumped ahead in history. Welfare is the best you can hope for under democrat rule. Be happy with your cake and keep voting democrat.

No hope for the future, no hope for your work just be happy with the ******* cake! That's the democrat way of trapping people in poverty. No worries though, you're in good hands with the government...eat your ******* cake and be happy.

 

[Chris]

States with higher minimum wage gain more jobs

Many business groups argue that raising the minimum wage discourages job growth by increasing the cost of hiring. A Congressional Budget Office report earlier this year lent some support for that view. It found that a minimum wage of $10.10 an hour, as President Obama supports, could cost 500,000 jobs nationwide.

But the state-by-state hiring data, released Friday by the Labor Department, provides ammunition to those who disagree. Economists who support a higher minimum say the figures are encouraging, though they acknowledge they don't establish a cause and effect. There are many possible reasons hiring might accelerate in a particular state.

People will work if you pay them more. More money means bills are paid, less debt, and more put back into the economy.

RWs prefer that people be on welfare.

Better yet, let them starve.

Based on the RWs posts on this board, I'd say their philosophy exemplifies the "let them eat cake' concept.

Pretty sure you don't understand history let alone the nuances of qoutes from the time.

"Let them eat cake" was a totalitarian government structure that was taking other people's earnings in order that they themselves never had to eat cake but thought that was good enough for everyone else.

The cake was welfare you two simple minded idiot's. It was deemed good enough for the peasantry by the holder's of power. Indeed it was good enough and more than should be expected from the democratic party...I'm sorry I jumped ahead in history. Welfare is the best you can hope for under democrat rule. Be happy with your cake and keep voting democrat.

No hope for the future, no hope for your work just be happy with the ******* cake! That's the democrat way of trapping people in poverty. No worries though, you're in good hands with the government...eat your ******* cake and be happy.

Only 1.7% of Americans get more than 50% of their income from welfare.

 

[Chris]

A low minimum wage that has failed to keep up with inflation or worker productivity creates a taxpayer subsidy to low-wage employers.

Raising the minimum wage would reduce the cost of social welfare programs, foster economic growth, and strengthen families - all virtues extolled by conservatives.