“In March, every Republican in the House voted against a measure to raise the minimum wage. `When you raise the price of employment, guess what happens? You get less of it,’ said Speaker John Boehner in February, espousing a party-line theory that most economists agree has been discredited.” — New York Times editorial, Jan. 2, 2014.
This is one of the more outrageous political statements dressed up as economic theory from the editorial board of the New York Times. They should be ashamed of themselves.
As for the discredited theory — the law of supply and demand — here’s Paul Krugman in a Feb. 17, 2013, New York Times column, explaining it to his colleagues on the opposite page:
“Economics 101 tells us to be very cautious about attempts to legislate market outcomes. Every textbook — mine included — lays out the unintended consequences that flow from policies like rent controls or agricultural price supports. And even most liberal economists would, I suspect, agree that setting a minimum wage of, say, $20 an hour would create a lot of problems.”
Krugman goes on to support an increase in the $7.25-an-hour minimum wage, relying on a 20-year old study of the fast-food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania that found no adverse effect on employment. In fact, it stands out like a sore thumb.
Economists David Neumark and William Wascher reviewed more than 100 studies on the minimum wage in a 2006 paper for the National Bureau of Economic Research: “Minimum Wages and Employment: A Review of Evidence from the New Minimum Wage Research.” Here’s a summary of their findings: “The oft-stated assertion that recent research fails to support the traditional view that the minimum wage reduces the employment of low-wage workers is clearly incorrect.” What’s more, almost all the papers they reviewed “point to negative employment effects” for the U.S. and many other countries. The effect is greater for low-skilled workers, whom the minimum wage is designed to help. Overall, the authors found very little evidence of positive effects from raising the minimum wage.
Neumark and Wascher responded to an “unbalanced” Sunday Review article on the effect of the minimum wage in a Dec. 8, 2013, letter to the editor. And the Washington Post’s Fact Checker gave President Barack Obama two Pinocchios for his repeated assertion that “there’s no solid evidence that a higher minimum wage costs jobs.”
The NY Times proves once again it has become part of the Democrat National Party
More at Bloomberg
There’s a Republican National Party, A Democratic National Party, as well as others. There is no Democrat National Party.
Dumb-ass!
They why are they not called Democratics?
Dumbass.
@retire05: Perhaps the same reason Republicans aren’t called Republics, Einstein!
@Ronald J. Ward:
It’s not the Republic Party, stupid, it’s the Republican Party, hence, Republicans.
So if it is Democratic Party, then they must be called Democratics
Dumbass.
@retire05: Whatever you say.
The GOP has been reaching out to a grammar-challenged demographic. Unfortunately, using “democrat” as an adjective fails to impress most people who were paying attention during their 5th grade English classes. It will also fail to impress most employers during job interviews. It might be best to point out this grammatical error to your children, if they tend to repeat it.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Another wonderful example of left wing vulgarity. Such ad hominem would get one immediately ejected from Puffington Host as they are completely intolerant.
Secondly, there are Republicans and Democrats. Oddly, there are no “Democratics”
Third, there’s nothing democratic about the democrat party. We have a wannabe dictator for President and they use agencies of the government to persecute citizens in the opposition.
To all:
The insipid arguments here are but one more distraction from the fact that the NY Times now takes orders from the White House.
@Greg:
Even if this were true, it would still be preferable than the left’s constantly reaching out to effort-challenged voters.
You could erase this obviously touchy subject, and be truthful in your party description if you made yourselves officially the Socialist party.
@Pete:
Then they could call it the “National Socialist Party.”
You know- just like Hitler’s party.
@drjohn:
Your silliness jogged my memory of reading Paul Brian’s definition several years ago.
“Certain Republican members of Congress have played the childish game in recent years of referring to the opposition as the “Democrat Party,” hoping to imply that Democrats are not truly democratic. They succeed only in making themselves sound ignorant, and so will you if you imitate them. The name is “Democratic Party.” After all, we don’t say “Republic Party.”
Paul Brians is an Emeritus Professor of English at Washington State University
and wrote that several years ago, way before today’s republicans took bullshit to a new level and just kept shoveling it until someone believes it. This was even before George W. Bush would often use it. But with GWB’s gross assault on the English language, I suppose people just over looked it.
“example of left wing vulgarity”, “ad hominem”? And then you vomit ” nothing democratic about the democrat party”, “persecute citizens”, “National Socialist Party” “just like Hitler’s party”.
Such festered hatred. Perhaps you can understand why rational Americans don’t take your ilk seriously and why you lose elections. And then again, perhaps you can’t.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You can keep your plan.
You can keep your doctor.
No one will take that away from you. No matter what. Period.
You worship a monstrous liar. People are catching on.
Your matter-of-fact statements of who I worship (which you have no way of knowing) is at least consistent with the abject bigotry and cowardly evasiveness of your resident trolls.
As far as your off topic PPACA rant, 8 years ago Bush’s Medicare prescription drug program knocked six million previously insured seniors out of coverage. Computer glitches prevented hundreds of thousands more from getting their medications.
I guess that was ok because, uh, we knew where Bush was, or, or, or something along that line of outrageous stupidity.
So what Ronald J Ward seems to be saying is that Bush did it, so it is fine if Obama does it.
I doubt that there was much that George W. Bush did that Ronald J Ward approved of, that is until it was Obama doing the same thing. Then Ronnie J was solidly on board with whatever it was that Obama was doing.
But who knew that RJW had such admiration for President Bush that he now gladly accepts those failures as being successes by the Marxist that currently puts his feet on the Resolution Desk.
@Ronald J. Ward:
How about providing a link to some reputable source for that little bit of information?
@retire05: How about educating yourself to some extent on politics or maybe take a tutorial on how to use a search engine?
@Ronald J. Ward:
If you knew nothing else about Ronald, this little exchange would prove he’s a liberal. He makes an assertion of fact and then demands someone else do the work of proving it.
@retire05:
The second a liberal is reduced to making Bush Obama’s equal he loses the argument.
@Ronald J. Ward:
That’s all you’ve got?
Think of all the energy you wasted typing that little ditty when all you had to do was cut and paste a link. That, in itself, shows you for the dumbass you are.
@DrJohn:
Ah, would we all be as intelligent as RJW fancies himself to be.
@
DrJohn: Seems like the deck’s pretty well stacked against me when it comes to winning an argument, especially when you always have that “do you still molest little boys?” card up your sleeve and Retire05 and Redteam as your official referees.
You do, I hope, realize how incredibly ridiculous your argumentative strategy is?
@Ronald J. Ward:
You started it, bub. Take it like a man.
This whining from a guy who fabricates statements and positions of others and demands others do his work and who “dismisses” anything he wants to avoid?
LOL
@Ronald J. Ward:
You do, I hope, realize how incredibly
ridiculousboring and mundane your argumentative strategy is?@DrJohn: I think we’ve been through that, remember?
Is there something here that’s tripping you up or are you indeed stupid?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Yes, we did go through your false accusations. Yes, we did cover your electronic lethargy.
I guess the dem-backed troll squad is off of holiday vacation?
Hilarious.
Not one troll “response” refutes the point of the post: the NYT is essentially a WH propaganda rag.
I guess their agreeing. Moving on…
(P.S. – posting nonsense responses in packs only makes the detractors look like petty idiots, not people with real opinions worth discussing. I wish real Democrats/liberals would post here and offer legitimate thoughts that would make all of us better people.).
It’s all a matter of degrees, isn’t it? You’d be hard pressed to convince most Americans that Social Security is a bad thing, or that the government has no business regulating anything on behalf of the community as a whole.
That too can be taken to extremes. Let a small enough percentage of a population own and control too much of a nation’s wealth and resources and show sufficient disregard for everyone else, and serious trouble will follow. History has demonstrated that again and again.
The middle path is the correct one.
@Nathan Blue:
Good luck in finding a real traditional Democrat or a true liberal in the Democratic Party of today. They don’t exist. Or did you not notice how the DNC purged itself of all the bluedogs? How did they do that, you ask? The DNC refuse to fund their campaigns enough to try to create a win. Just take a look at the list of names of the members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, started by Bernie Sanders, a self proclaimed Socialist and now headed by Raul Grijalva, an open borders, re-distributionist Socialist who uses the (D) behind his name for cover.
@Greg:
Not withstanding that the people collecting Social Security were forced by the federal government to pay into the system all their working lives, they are collecting against a program they paid into. Now, equate that with those who are products of generational welfare. Do you think the leech feels guilty when it is sucking the blood out of you?
And history has demonstrated, time and time again, that capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system known to man.
There is no middle ground with our current crop of Democrat Socialists.
@Greg:
“reaching out to a grammar-challenged demographic”
That’s your base.
You’d be hard pressed to convince most Americans that Social Security is a bad thing
I wouldn’t be hard pressed to challenge the argument.
What’s the percent of working households who cared about Social Security prior to 1913?
Greg says,
Facts will again be disregarded exchanged for indoctrination.
Daily Kos: Income Inequality has grown much faster under Obama than George W. Bush.
It’s Bush’s fault.
@Ronald J. Ward:
“Is there something here that’s tripping you up or are you indeed stupid? [Are you] hoping to imply that Democrats are not truly democratic.”
[Reminder: Democracy is only mob rule without the Rule of Law. A transient majority is the worst threat to your liberty as we have seen the world over].
American Socialist Voter–
Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA?
A: Seventy
Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee?
A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez,
Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA].
Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress?
A: See the listing below
Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)
Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)
Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)
House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)
Since most of the media are brainwashing machines for the liberals, I call them the propaganda media, and they live up to it on a daily basis.
Destroying the NYSlimes article, one point at a time:
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-benghazi-whitewash-new-york-times.html
I used to be hopeful that all of the liberal newspapers would go out of business, then I realize that I don’t know of any conservative newspapers, so if all of the liberal newspapers vanish, what will I wrap my fish and other messy garbage in? At least they are good for something. I guess we need to keep one of them until there is a conservative one created.