CBO: $10 minimum wage = 500,000 -1,000,000 lost jobs

 

Why not $100?

Why not $100?

“But we have rounded up our own economists,” the White House claims,”and their consensus is that nothing bad will happen – who ya gonna believe, the non-partisan CBO or our lying guys?”

The White House may have to scrap its plans to aggressively promote a 40 per cent national minimum wage hike now that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that the move would likely cost the U.S. 500,000 jobs by the second half of 2016.

The CBO’s report, released Tuesday afternoon, also estimated that it would pull 900,000 low-income Americans above the federal government’s poverty line.

The White House didn’t answer questions about whether that trade-off is acceptable to President Obama, but Senate Democrats have pushed hard for legislation that would implement his goal of driving the minimum wage far above its current $7.25 level.

But it quickly scheduled an afternoon conference call for reporters with Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Jason Furman, and published a blog post so lengthy that it suggests the White House had advance notice of the CBO’s findings.

A conservative policy group, the Employment Policies Institute, has predicted the CBO’s findings for years, saying that a $10.10 minimum wage would kill between 360,000 and 1 million jobs, mostly those of young, low-skill workers who would be the first to go if employers were forced to pay higher salaries out of the same pool of money.

Like everything else predicted about the progressive movement: the destruction of the black family, the ruination of the public education system, the job-killing effect of gargantuan environmental regulations, this too will be ignored – hell, they’ll never hear about it on their daily 30-second news fix – and they’ll continue on voting Democrat, hating the Tea Party meanies and wondering why their country keeps going to hell.

12 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

12 responses to “CBO: $10 minimum wage = 500,000 -1,000,000 lost jobs

  1. anon2

    I would think pulling 900,000 above the poverty line would cause WORSE problems – low income to qualify for Medicaid, free phones, and food stamps. It’s a lose-lose situation for the liberal goal of all good things come to those who bow down to government.

  2. Anonymous

    I know a certain business man who owns a business that started back in the early 1930s. Sure the business has changed hands over the years, but neither wars nor economic downturns could close this business. Now the business owner, a staunch Democrat, has bemoaned to me that his business has begun faltering and he may be forced to close his doors. Well I said, what wars and faltering economies couldn’t accomplish, Barry managed to do in only 5 years (his business is facing ever increasing regulatory, tax and healthcare costs). To this he retorted (say it with me class), it’s Bush’s fault. Liberals never learn. They are the definition of insanity. They have the president and congress they deserve. When unemployment rises, they can just shake their heads and point to the greedy business owners as the root cause for all that’s wrong in their lives.

    • Chief Scrotum

      If your pal was as smart as you think, he’d pony up some cash for the DNC and all would be well. Even the dopey teachers union knows that!

    • Libertarian Advocate

      For him to acknowledge that Obama and Keynesian policy on Roids is at fault for the demise of his business is to admit that he got suckered by a flimflam man. A lot of people can’t face that kind of embarrassment because it reveals them to be … well … SUCKERS.

  3. anony

    Labor Union Self Interest: Facts Behind Organized Labor’s Push to Raise the Federal Minimum Wage

    http://www.unionfacts.com/article/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Union_Minimum_Wage_report.pdf

    A higher min wage not only eliminates low wage competition but also kicks in a raise under many union contracts. So while it hurts the introductory workers, it’s a win/win for unions and the deems they fund.

    • Anonymous

      But, didn’t Chris’s leftist partner quickly and authoritatively dismiss the existence of these agreements in a prior post? Shocked by his ignorance or dishonesty (take your pick) until I remembered that he is a Gwich real estate agent.

    • pulled up in OG

      Holy crap! Contracts that guarantee fifteen cents and twenty cents and even a quarter over minimum wage. Friggin’ scum oughta be ashamed o’ themselves.

      • Anonymous

        If such a nonevent and benevolent move, why obscure or lie about it? Just the default move for a liberal / Gwich real estate agent?

    • burningmadolf

      I think it was me who asked the question when Malloy was pumping this monkey and it was stated that this is not the case with CT unions ;)

  4. Anonymous

    Wait, what? Does CF have any “leftist partners”? – No. C’mon, really?. And “shocked by his ignorance or dishonesty (take your pick)”? Huh??