- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Number of low wage jobs fall 6.8%, hours worked fall 9% in seattle after min wage increase
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:53 am
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:53 am
just released article by 538
lol at seattle.
quote:
In January 2016, Seattle’s minimum wage jumped from $11 an hour to $13 for large employers, the second big increase in less than a year. New research released Monday by a team of economists at the University of Washington suggests the wage hike may have come at a significant cost: The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers, and a drop in hours for those who kept their jobs. Crucially, the negative impact of lost jobs and hours more than offset the benefits of higher wages — on average, low-wage workers earned $125 per month less because of the higher wage, a small but significant decline.
quote:
Monday’s report looks at the impact of the second wage increase under the law: the January 2016 hike to $13 an hour for large employers. This time, the findings look very different: Compared to a counterfactual in which Seattle didn’t raise its minimum wage, the number of hours worked by low-wage workers (those earning less than $19 an hour) fell by 9.4 percent over the first nine months of 2016, and the number of low-wage jobs fell by 6.8 percent. Cumulatively, those add up to the losses of 5,000 jobs and 3.5 million hours of work. The average low-wage employee, they found, saw his or her monthly paycheck shrink by $125, or 6.6 percent.
lol at seattle.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
And they really thought that this wasn't going to happen???
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Crucially, the negative impact of lost jobs and hours more than offset the benefits of higher wages — on average, low-wage workers earned $125 per month less because of the higher wage, a small but significant decline.
Science.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
but they feel better about it i guess
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Yea, no one saw that coming.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
I can't believe this!
It's not possible!
It's not possible!
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Lol economics is harrrrrd
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Raising the cost of labor without regards to business profitability is never a good idea.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
the number of hours worked by low-wage workers (those earning less than $19 an hour)
That's more that I made with a degree in 2000.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:57 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers, and a drop in hours for those who kept their jobs. Crucially, the negative impact of lost jobs and hours more than offset the benefits of higher wages — on average, low-wage workers earned $125 per month less because of the higher wage, a small but significant decline.
"But they now have more time to pursue creative pursuits."
Signed, Nancy Pelosi
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:57 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
This is all common sense economics. Yet some still think its a good idea to raise minimum wage
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:58 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The increase led to steep declines in employment for low-wage workers, and a drop in hours for those who kept their jobs
Massive transfer of wealth to the richest americans!!
Am I doing it right?
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:04 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Lol economics is harrrrrd
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:07 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Who could have predicted that? ROFLMAO
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:08 pm to the808bass
125 per month is "insignificant"?
Bull shite
Bull shite
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:09 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The average low-wage employee, they found, saw his or her monthly paycheck shrink by $125, or 6.6 percent
This is completely irrelevant to a liberal.
All a liberal cares about is being able to say they INTENDED it to help poor people
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:10 pm to gthog61
quote:
125 per month is "insignificant"?
That's not what it said. It said "small but significant."
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News