BlackCrypt wrote:
The Congressional Budget Office is nonpartisan and stacked with well-trained economists, so when it says that a $10.10 federal minimum wage could cost about half a million jobs—as it did today—the conclusion deserves to be taken seriously
You should have read the CBO report before parroting this crap.
The CBO report said 16.5 million people who are now getting paid less than 10.10/hour would see higher wages. 500,000 of those getting paid less than 10.10/hour would get laid off.
So if you are making less than 10.10/hour, there is a 97% chance you will get a pay hike and a 3% change you will get laid off (.5/17=1.03)
500,000 jobs is .3% of total employment (.5/170=1.003, projected employment level in 2016 is 170 million). The employment to population ratio would be reduced by .3% lower (today that would mean going from 58.8 to 58.62%)
Pretty sure everyone who is making less than $10.10/hour would support a higher minimum wage since there is only a 3% chance they will be worse off. In other words, the report is favorable to a higher minimum wage.
So go ahead and take it seriously.
The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family Income
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995
Many more low-wage workers would see an increase in their earnings. Of those workers who will earn up to $10.10 under current law, most—about 16.5 million, according to CBO’s estimates—would have higher earnings during an average week in the second half of 2016 if the $10.10 option was implemented.
Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent