CBO Report on Raising Minimum Wage

[IGotWorms 4,058]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/19/business/mixed-results-in-us-study-of-increasing-minimum-wage.html?hpw&rref=us&_r=0&referrer=

 

WASHINGTON A popular Democratic proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour, championed by President Obama, might reduce total employment by 500,000 workers by the second half of 2016. But it would also lift 900,000 families out of poverty and increase the incomes of 16.5 million low-wage workers in an average week.

 

That is the conclusion of a detailed assessment of how raising the minimum wage would affect incomes, employment and the federal budget. The report was released Tuesday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

 

The complicated, nuanced analysis provides fuel for both supporters and critics of the policy, which would affect millions of low-wage workers and businesses showing it might lead to fewer jobs, but also higher incomes.

 

Republicans said the report demonstrated the damage that raising the minimum wage in a weak economy could do.

 

This report confirms what weve long known, said Brendan Buck, a spokesman for House Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio. While helping some, mandating higher wages has real costs, including fewer people working. With unemployment Americans top concern, our focus should be creating not destroying jobs for those who need them most.

 

But Democrats stressed that the proposal would lift millions of families out of poverty. Some also criticized the budget offices employment analysis, with Representative George Miller, a California Democrat, calling it outdated.

 

The C.B.O. made it absolutely clear: raising the minimum wage would lift almost one million Americans out of poverty, increase the pay of low-income workers by $31 billion and help build an economy that works for everyone, said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the minority leader.

 

The budget office found that lifting the federal minimum wage, currently $7.25 an hour, would have a complicated effect on the labor market, acting as both a boon and a burden for businesses and workers.

 

Over all, the budget office estimated that lifting the minimum wage to $10.10 and indexing it to inflation would reduce total employment by about 0.3 percent, or 500,000 workers. But it cautioned that its estimate was imprecise, with the job losses likely to fall in a range from scant to one million.

 

The proposal would result in winners and losers among the low-wage workers it would focus on, the report found. Some low-wage workers would fail to find a job because of a higher minimum wage, for instance. Thus, some families would see their earnings fall sharply.

 

But increasing the minimum wage would bolster the earnings of about 16.5 million workers: $5 billion a year more for families living in poverty, $12 billion a year more for families earning from one to three times the poverty threshold.

Interesting competing policy implications there. Personally it seems to me that doing anything that would increase unemployment would be a bad idea in the current climate.

[jerryskids 6,790]

Good thread. My concern is that it is a huge percentage increase which will cause a lot of layoffs. A small increase (or perhaps none) but indexing to inflation would help people over time without the cliff effect.

[Geezil 24]

This will devastate many small businesses. Not everyone works for a corporation. Some people just have jobs working for local businesses and local business owners in today's economy are struggling. This will definitely put quite a few out of business who are barely hanging on as it is. I don't buy the numbers. 500,000 is extremely low in my opinion.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Good thread. My concern is that it is a huge percentage increase which will cause a lot of layoffs. A small increase (or perhaps none) but indexing to inflation would help people over time without the cliff effect.

The article actually discusses two proposals the CBO evaluated: one being a big increase with future increases tied to inflation, which is in the part of the article I quoted. The second is a small increase with no future ties to inflation. The CBO concluded the former would have huge ripple effects while the latter wouldn't do a ton either way.

 

It's too bad they didn't analyze the possibility you suggest, but I'm guessing that means nobody in Congress has proposed it for some reason? I guess it wouldn't really make either side happy--too much for conservatives and not enough for liberals? But often the best compromises are those that leave everyone dissatisfied

[NorthernVike 2,085]

Obama likes poor people so much, he made millions more of them.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Good thread. My concern is that it is a huge percentage increase which will cause a lot of layoffs. A small increase (or perhaps none) but indexing to inflation would help people over time without the cliff effect.

 

Agreed...seems like something that is needed slowly.

To minimize the effect on those small businesses.

In the end, much will get passed on to the consumer as always.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

My take. It helps the lower earners and hurts the higher ones.

 

For example: Walmart pays cashiers from minimum-20 an hour. If they have to start people at 10 an hour then they will peak people at 14-15.

 

I do not know how it will affect all Walmarts because it only applies to a federal minimum wage. Does this mean since Walmart has federal contracts they must pay every employee the federal minimum wage?

[montana 89]

Terrible idea.

Basic business sense: If the product or service provided costs more to produce (whether it be materials, labor, logistically, etc...), the price for that product/service will cost more to obtain.

Businesses (big & small) will NOT "eat" the jump in the additional costs of doing business. At least not all of it.

Do you really think the "Fat Cats" will settle to make less & have a lower GP?...not to mention the hit the shareholders would take because of the lowered GP?

 

Please. Bunch of focktards.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Terrible idea.

Basic business sense: If the product or service provided costs more to produce (whether it be materials, labor, logistically, etc...), the price for that product/service will cost more to obtain.

Businesses (big & small) will NOT "eat" the jump in the additional costs of doing business. At least not all of it.

Do you really think the "Fat Cats" will settle to make less & have a lower GP?...not to mention the hit the shareholders would take because of the lowered GP?

Please. Bunch of focktards.

So maybe we should cap the fat cats' salaries instead?

[NorthernVike 2,085]

So maybe we should cap the fat cats' salaries instead?

Yes comrade

[IGotWorms 4,058]

My take. It helps the lower earners and hurts the higher ones.

 

For example: Walmart pays cashiers from minimum-20 an hour. If they have to start people at 10 an hour then they will peak people at 14-15.

 

I do not know how it will affect all Walmarts because it only applies to a federal minimum wage. Does this mean since Walmart has federal contracts they must pay every employee the federal minimum wage?

You are confused. This article refers to a federal minimum wage hike applicable to all workers. The executive order Obama has mentioned is much, much more limited in scope and applies only to federal contract workers. So, for example, food service workers at the Capital Building and such. Obviously this would not impact the Walmarts of the world.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

You are confused. This article refers to a federal minimum wage hike applicable to all workers. The executive order Obama has mentioned is much, much more limited in scope and applies only to federal contract workers. So, for example, food service workers at the Capital Building and such. Obviously this would not impact the Walmarts of the world.

I am confused. The reason is the CBO reports states pretty clearly that this will help 16.5 million workers, and I have a difficult time believing that roughly 10% of the work force is a federal minimum wage employee. If, however, it covered any company that has a federal contract, I can see it.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

I am confused. The reason is the CBO reports states pretty clearly that this will help 16.5 million workers, and I have a difficult time believing that roughly 10% of the work force is a federal minimum wage employee. If, however, it covered any company that has a federal contract, I can see it.

That doesn't make sense. Obviously there are more minimum wage workers generally than minimum wage federal-contract workers.

 

Not to mention the fact that we aren't even talking strictly minimum wage workers--this would impact everyone who makes minimum wage and everyone who makes up to about $3/hr over the current minimum wage. Plus I believe the article stated that the proposal would apply to tipped workers as well so toss in all waiters, waitresses, etc. Pretty easy to get to 16.5 million that way I imagine.

[MDC 7,401]

I am really skeptical of raising the minimum wage as a strategy for helping poor people. I'm guessing a substantial % of min wage earners are minors or students and not really supporting families anyway. And as for the rest, if you're making $7.50/hour without benefits a jump to $10 is welcome but I doubt you can live on that anyway. That's not a reason to not raise the minimum wage, just saying I doubt raising the MW will have much effect on poverty.

[Mungwater 597]

It's a bad idea to do it at once, should have a tier system that escalates it over time or one that keeps up with inflation. Anything other than that would be a disaster

[NorthernVike 2,085]

You are confused. This article refers to a federal minimum wage hike applicable to all workers. The executive order Obama has mentioned is much, much more limited in scope and applies only to federal contract workers. So, for example, food service workers at the Capital Building and such. Obviously this would not impact the Walmarts of the world.

 

 

Walmart Hourly Pay

4,977 employee salaries (for 524 job titles) Back to all Walmart salaries

• Sort: Most SalariesHighest PayingLowest Paying

Updated Feb 15, 2014

Salaries in USD Avg. Salary

$10

$15

Sales Associate

484 Walmart Salaries

$8.89

$7

$18

Guest Service Team Member - Cashier

292 Walmart Salaries

$8.48

$7

$12

Wal Mart Cashier

207 Walmart Salaries

$8.52

$7

$13

Department Manager

178 Walmart Salaries

$11.21

$8

$20

Overnight Stocker

157 Walmart Salaries

$9.67

$7

$17

Customer Service Manager (CSM)

134 Walmart Salaries

$10.34

$8

$16

Associate

125 Walmart Salaries

$9.44

$7

$18

Cashier Associate

123 Walmart Salaries

$8.63

$7

$14

Electronic Sales Associate

97 Walmart Salaries

$9.21

$7

$12

Walmart Cashier

92 Walmart Salaries

$8.64

$7

$13

Customer Service Manager

75 Walmart Salaries

$10.41

$9

$14

Customer Service Associate

71 Walmart Salaries

$9.25

$8

$14

Pharmacy Technician

61 Walmart Salaries

$10.52

$8

$16

Asset Protection Associate

59 Walmart Salaries

$11.45

$9

$20

Inventory Associate

57 Walmart Salaries

$9.01

$8

$12

 

 

http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Walmart-Hourly-Pay-E715.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

the above shows the average pay and the pay range for Walmart employee's.

 

 

Everyone likes to biotch about Walmart yet their average pay is very close to what is being proposed anyhow. Add in benifits and it would take them over the proposed min wage. In my area, there is an add for cahiers starting at $10 an hour.

 

 

The only people this will hurt are your mom and pop shops that hire skool kids and not big bad businesses.

[parrot 789]

My take. It helps the lower earners and hurts the higher ones.

 

For example: Walmart pays cashiers from minimum-20 an hour. If they have to start people at 10 an hour then they will peak people at 14-15.

 

I do not know how it will affect all Walmarts because it only applies to a federal minimum wage. Does this mean since Walmart has federal contracts they must pay every employee the federal minimum wage?

 

I don't know about this. I guess you're operating under the assumption that Wal Mart has a fixed budget pool they pay cashiers from. Maybe they do, I don't know. But I can tell you that the business I work for hires cashiers as well, and my guess is that it would have the opposite effect for us. Having to pay $10 an hour to hire a new employee, who you would have previously started at $7 and change, and who may or may not work out, might give you some extra incentive to pay the people you have a little more to retain them. I think it will put upward pressure on all lower-end hourly wages. The problem is that will probably also result in upward pressure on price levels, so at the end of the day, what have they really gained?

 

This, coming right on top of Obamacare, which is already giving companies pause about adding new hires, would be a disaster in my opinion.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

 

 

Walmart Hourly Pay

4,977 employee salaries (for 524 job titles) Back to all Walmart salaries

 

• Sort: Most SalariesHighest PayingLowest Paying

Updated Feb 15, 2014

Salaries in USD Avg. Salary

 

 

$10

 

$15

Sales Associate

484 Walmart Salaries$8.89

 

 

 

$7

$18

 

Guest Service Team Member - Cashier

292 Walmart Salaries$8.48

 

 

 

$7

$12

 

Wal Mart Cashier

207 Walmart Salaries$8.52

 

 

 

$7

$13

 

Department Manager

178 Walmart Salaries$11.21

 

 

 

$8

$20

 

Overnight Stocker

157 Walmart Salaries$9.67

 

 

 

$7

$17

 

Customer Service Manager (CSM)

134 Walmart Salaries$10.34

 

 

 

$8

$16

 

Associate

125 Walmart Salaries$9.44

 

 

 

$7

$18

 

Cashier Associate

123 Walmart Salaries$8.63

 

 

 

$7

$14

 

Electronic Sales Associate

97 Walmart Salaries$9.21

 

 

 

$7

$12

 

Walmart Cashier

92 Walmart Salaries$8.64

 

 

 

$7

$13

 

Customer Service Manager

75 Walmart Salaries$10.41

 

 

 

$9

$14

 

Customer Service Associate

71 Walmart Salaries$9.25

 

 

 

$8

$14

 

Pharmacy Technician

61 Walmart Salaries$10.52

 

 

 

$8

$16

 

Asset Protection Associate

59 Walmart Salaries$11.45

 

 

 

$9

$20

 

Inventory Associate

57 Walmart Salaries$9.01

 

 

 

$8

$12

 

 

http://www.glassdoor.com/Hourly-Pay/Walmart-Hourly-Pay-E715.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

the above shows the average pay and the pay range for Walmart employee's.

 

 

Everyone likes to biotch about Walmart yet their average pay is very close to what is being proposed anyhow. Add in benifits and it would take them over the proposed min wage. In my area, there is an add for cahiers starting at $10 an hour.

 

 

The only people this will hurt are your mom and pop shops that hire skool kids and not big bad businesses.

I think you missed the point of my posts.

[montana 89]

So maybe we should cap the fat cats' salaries instead?

Let me get this straight.

If you started your own business & worked your arse off for...say 20 years, & you finally got to the point that it was making enough money for you to step away from (take personal time/vacations, etc...) - you'd be ok if Uncle Sam stepped in & denied you this luxury because he felt you made too much?

[drobeski 3,061]

Let me get this straight.

If you started your own business & worked your arse off for...say 20 years, & you finally got to the point that it was making enough money for you to step away from (take personal time/vacations, etc...) - you'd be ok if Uncle Sam stepped in & denied you this luxury because he felt you made too much?

they should start with doctors and lawyers

[penultimatestraw 473]

Yes comrade

 

Not saying I believe it should be done, but if the cap is based on a multiple of the worker bee, instead of an absolute number, wouldn't that promote better pay for the underlings without passing costs to the consumer?

[penultimatestraw 473]

they should start with doctors and lawyers

I have no problem with decreasing physician pay, but don't believe the pay gap in medicine is nearly that of the corporate world.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Let me get this straight.

If you started your own business & worked your arse off for...say 20 years, & you finally got to the point that it was making enough money for you to step away from (take personal time/vacations, etc...) - you'd be ok if Uncle Sam stepped in & denied you this luxury because he felt you made too much?

Perhaps upper executive pay should be proportionate to the underlings only in larger companies instead?

[IGotWorms 4,058]

I understand the rhetorical force of absurd executive pay as a unified symbol of ever-increasing income inequality in the United States. But would it really make much difference if that was changed? Say every CEO of a large company had his pay slashed and the difference distributed among all the lower-paid employees in the company. What would this really amount to?

 

Ford, for example, has 224,000 employees worldwide. The company's CEO makes about $30 million per year. An absurd number, for sure, but distributed amongst all employees in the company we're talking roughly $134 bucks per person. Does it really matter if the average Ford worker makes $134 more per year?

 

I realize this is a very simplistic analysis of the situation but I really do wonder just how much executive pay matters other than for appearance's sake.

[wiffleball 4,790]

And what's the deal with the @ sign? I mean, do we really need some horribly difficult to write symbol to replace a 2-letter word?

[DankNuggs 305]

It's all BS. Misplaced rage they the economy sucks. If everyone has jobs and there was good demand for workers this doesn't exist. The idiots in charge con the sheep into this misdirection.

 

 

How is it remotely relevant to them whether the CEO of Walmart makes 1m 5m, 10m?

 

It's completely irrelevant to the demand for their services

[IGotWorms 4,058]

And what's the deal with the @ sign? I mean, do we really need some horribly difficult to write symbol to replace a 2-letter word?

[Phurfur 70]

The person who shows the most ambition, shows up on time, is gonna be more valuable. It's just that simple! It's competition. It brings out the best in everybody

[penultimatestraw 473]

The person who shows the most ambition, shows up on time, is gonna be more valuable. It's just that simple! It's competition. It brings out the best in everybody

that sounds great, but is far too simplistic. Many terrible things have been in the name of gaining a competitive edge.

[Phurfur 70]

SURVEY: WAGE HIKE WOULD HIT HIRING

 

President Obama may have a more difficult time making his pitch to raise the minimum wage in scheduled interviews with local television stations today following the release of a new survey of employers that finds the proposal would do more to hurt the unemployed already struggling to find work. From WSJ: Just over half of U.S. businesses that pay the minimum wage would hire fewer workers if the federal standard is raised to $10.10 per hour, according to a survey by a large staffing firm to be released Wednesday. But the same poll found a majority of those companies would not cut their current workforce. About two-thirds of employers paying the minimum wage said they would raise prices for goods or services in response to an increase, the survey by Express Employment Professionals found. About 54% of minimum-wage employers would reduce hiring if the federally mandated rate increased by $2.85 per hour. A smaller share38% said they would lay off employees if the wage increase favored by President Barack Obama becomes law.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/19/study-38-percent-private-employers-will-cut-workers-if-minimum-wage-is-raised/?intcmp=latestnews

[jerryskids 6,790]

SURVEY: WAGE HIKE WOULD HIT HIRING

 

President Obama may have a more difficult time making his pitch to raise the minimum wage in scheduled interviews with local television stations today following the release of a new survey of employers that finds the proposal would do more to hurt the unemployed already struggling to find work. From WSJ: Just over half of U.S. businesses that pay the minimum wage would hire fewer workers if the federal standard is raised to $10.10 per hour, according to a survey by a large staffing firm to be released Wednesday. But the same poll found a majority of those companies would not cut their current workforce. About two-thirds of employers paying the minimum wage said they would raise prices for goods or services in response to an increase, the survey by Express Employment Professionals found. About 54% of minimum-wage employers would reduce hiring if the federally mandated rate increased by $2.85 per hour. A smaller share38% said they would lay off employees if the wage increase favored by President Barack Obama becomes law.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/19/study-38-percent-private-employers-will-cut-workers-if-minimum-wage-is-raised/?intcmp=latestnews

Raising the minimum wage would significantly reduce hiring and cause layoffs... I'm shocked.

 

I dunno, I'm toying with the idea that we should maybe do it. We've built this bullshiot house-of-cards economy where being a McDonalds fry cook went from being the first job for a teenager to a career for an adult. Maybe we should accelerate that inanity and face the consequences.

[Vikings4ever 550]

Raising the minimum wage would significantly reduce hiring and cause layoffs... I'm shocked.

 

I dunno, I'm toying with the idea that we should maybe do it. We've built this bullshiot house-of-cards economy where being a McDonalds fry cook went from being the first job for a teenager to a career for an adult. Maybe we should accelerate that inanity and face the consequences.

In addition to this, why hire an American for 15 bucks an hour when you can hire Apu in India for 1.50 an hour?

[Phurfur 70]

Raising the minimum wage would significantly reduce hiring and cause layoffs... I'm shocked.

 

I dunno, I'm toying with the idea that we should maybe do it. We've built this bullshiot house-of-cards economy where being a McDonalds fry cook went from being the first job for a teenager to a career for an adult. Maybe we should accelerate that inanity and face the consequences.

Raising the minimum wage that much will make it cost effective to automate or out source many of these jobs.

[Phurfur 70]

RICHMOND, Calif. – A San Francisco Bay Area city is on track to have the highest minimum wage in California.

 

The Richmond City Council voted 6-1 on Tuesday in favor of an ordinance that would raise minimum hourly pay in the city to $12.30 an hour by 2017.

 

That would be nearly $2 more than San Francisco's current minimum wage, which is the highest in the region.

 

The state minimum wage is set to increase to $10 an hour in January 2016.

 

The Contra Costa Times reports that most of the 30 or so residents who spoke at the Richmond council meeting were in favor of raising the minimum wage.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/20/california-city-approves-1230-minimum-wage/?intcmp=latestnews

[Mike Honcho 5,269]

Terrible idea.

Basic business sense: If the product or service provided costs more to produce (whether it be materials, labor, logistically, etc...), the price for that product/service will cost more to obtain.

Businesses (big & small) will NOT "eat" the jump in the additional costs of doing business. At least not all of it.

Do you really think the "Fat Cats" will settle to make less & have a lower GP?...not to mention the hit the shareholders would take because of the lowered GP?

 

Please. Bunch of focktards.

 

In your lesson on basic business, you seemed to ignore that stagnant wages result in workers effectively being paid for 28 hours of work, while working 40 hours(inflation). That's all profit on the biz/employer side.

[Phurfur 70]

In your lesson on basic business, you seemed to ignore that stagnant wages result in workers effectively being paid for 28 hours of work, while working 40 hours(inflation). That's all profit on the biz/employer side.

 

I will quote Jerry. "We've built this bullshiot house-of-cards economy where being a McDonalds fry cook went from being the first job for a teenager to a career for an adult".

 

BTW: When is the last time you got a 39% raise for doing exactly the same job?

[DankNuggs 305]

clearly it would hurt existing jobs, and it will also impact job growth.

 

I am not against minimum wage increases provided it is coupled with job growth initiatives like lowering business taxes or some other clevar idea.

[SUXBNME 1,499]

 

Ford, for example, has 224,000 employees worldwide. The company's CEO makes about $30 million per year. An absurd number, for sure,

Please explain to me how this is an absurd number.

[Googballz 39]

 

 

Ford, for example, has 224,000 employees worldwide. The company's CEO makes about $30 million per year. An absurd number, for sure,

So exactly what amount do you think they should pay the guy responsible for making sure 224,000 families have an income to support their lives?

[MDC 7,401]

So exactly what amount do you think they should pay the guy responsible for making sure 224,000 families have an income to support their lives?

I'm guessing his primary responsibility is to shareholders, not the employees.