Started By
Message
locked post

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 by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69301 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:53 am
just released article by 538
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 by 50_Tiger
Dallas TX
Member since Jan 2016
40094 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to
And they really thought that this wasn't going to happen???
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111524 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to
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 by FandIgod
BATON ROUGE
Member since Jun 2017
217 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to
but they feel better about it i guess
Posted by Scruffy
Kansas City
Member since Jul 2011
72103 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:55 am to
Yea, no one saw that coming.
Posted by LSU Patrick
Member since Jan 2009
73494 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to
I can't believe this!

It's not possible!
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
35031 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to
Lol economics is harrrrrd
Posted by Kino74
Denham springs
Member since Nov 2013
5344 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to
Raising the cost of labor without regards to business profitability is never a good idea.
Posted by Eli Goldfinger
Member since Sep 2016
32785 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:56 am to
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 by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118782 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:57 am to
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 by PhillipJFry
Member since Sep 2016
964 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:57 am to
This is all common sense economics. Yet some still think its a good idea to raise minimum wage
Posted by Lsuchs
Member since Apr 2013
8073 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:58 am to
No longer job locked
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
39484 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 11:58 am to
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 by Roaad
White Privilege Broker
Member since Aug 2006
76486 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:04 pm to
quote:

Lol economics is harrrrrd
Posted by Gnar Cat21
Piña Coladaburg
Member since Sep 2009
16840 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:04 pm to
Shocking.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:07 pm to
Who could have predicted that? ROFLMAO
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:08 pm to
125 per month is "insignificant"?

Bull shite
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:09 pm to
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 by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
67920 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:09 pm to
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111524 posts
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:10 pm to
quote:

125 per month is "insignificant"?


That's not what it said. It said "small but significant."
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram