WaPo advocates reducing minimum wage to boost job growth?

[babylonsister]

http://mediamatters.org/blog/200912140016

Is Charles Lane (and Fox News) advocating a wage cut for millions of Americans?

December 14, 2009 12:46 pm ET by Terry Krepel


Conservatives who bash The Washington Post as liberal tend to overlook the streak of conservatism that runs through the Post's editorial pages -- indeed, we've detailed how some Post editorial positions dovetail nicely with those of the unambiguously conservative Wall Street Journal.

Given that history, it's no surprise that Post editorial page staff member Charles Lane would pen a column that advocates, as one way to boost job growth, reducing the minimum wage. No, really.

In support of this claim, Lane cites the increase in unemployment as the minimum wage increased in increments over the past three years, adding: "I am not saying that the minimum wage increase caused this; far from it. But study after study has shown that this supposed benefit to the poor prices low-skilled workers out of entry-level jobs. It was unwise to keep raising the cost of hiring them in a recession." But Lane ignores that there are studies showing that raising the minimum wage has no significant effect on unemployment -- this one, for instance, and this one.

It's probably not surprising that Lane goes on to cite a Journal op-ed to make his case.

Missing from Lane's article, on top of the lack of data that conflicts with his suggestion, is any acknowledgement of the impact of cutting wages of people who aren't making that much in the first place. As the Economic Policy Institute points out, 4.5 million Americans saw a wage increase with the most recent incremental hike. Is cutting those wages really a smart thing to do in a recession?

Lane's other suggestions are equally dubious. It's unclear how ending federal protection of the domestic sugar industry will create jobs, nor does he explain how repealing the Davis-Bacon Act (which mandates that federally funded projects pay the prevailing local wage) will do anything other than lower wages.

But never mind. Lane's minimum wage suggestion got attention at the one place you'd expect it to (outside the Journal, anyway): Fox News.

James Rosen's report on the December 14 edition of America's Newsroom prominently features Lane's column, as well as similar claims by the author of the Journal op-ed Lane cited, David Neumark. Like Lane, Rosen ignored studies that show the minimum wage does not impact unemployment, though he conceded that a rollback is unlikely.

Rosen went on to misconstrue the debate on the issue, portraying it as between Democrats citing "social justice" and Republicans speaking "in macroeconomic terms" -- ignoring there's an macroeconomic argument for raising the minimum wage in terms of increased consumer spending.

If The Washington Post is supposed to be so unapologetically liberal, why is it manufacturing catnip for Fox News?

[BrklynLiberal]

1. Whata a crock!!! That is just another way to help the rich get richer..

[FiveGoodMen]

5. Which, at this point, is the only real purpose of the US government.

[BrklynLiberal]

23. So it would seem.

:mad:

[bluestateguy]

2. I'm sure we would have full employemnt if we re-legalized slavery

"Hey our labor costs are down!"

Washington Beltway cocktail party nonsense.

[TwilightGardener]

3. I'm sure businesses and corporations would love to save money on the backs of

the lowest-paid workers, and then STILL not hire--just work the bottom rung of employees even harder.

[hobbit709]

4. Sure, if the cost of everything goes back to 1970 prices too.

and I suggest the first wages to be cut are the idiot's that wrote this.

[peacetalksforall]

6. Proof positive. $6.00 is the target for the conversion of our country to a

third world country. Rich and poor with a tiny middle. That is the baron plan for us.

May not be proof positive, it may be proof indicative - using a columnist for WaPo to plant ideas in the head - from the right wing WP - decades of ultra Republican right wing policies and ideology pusher.

[Kokonoe]

7. Because it is Fox News. Or is it just the Washinton Post. ? eom

[babylonsister]

8. Both. faux is feeding off the WaPo story. nt

[Kokonoe]

21. Sometimes I wonder who what the name brand is.

I want to thank you for everything you do. So Thanks.
Much appreciation, koko

[Better Today]

9. WTF!!! Are the lowest classes always going to be the bearer of the brunt of discomfort?

WTF WTF WTF WTF AAARRRRGGGGG!

[guitar man]

12. yep

we will be until we stand up...it won't ever get any better until we stop laying down and letting them steamroll us :grr:

[sarge43]

10. You first, Charlie. n/t

[guitar man]

11. You first Charles

I want to see this motherfucker that wrote this shit try to live on $5.00 an hour. :grr:

[iamtechus]

13. Increasing the tax on corporate profits would cause less hunger. nt

[elehhhhna]

14. A "maximum wage" ceiling would do more good.

[hayu_lol]

18. Newspapers are the cheapest payers around...

instead of reducing all the worker bees to a minimum that business wants...limit CEO salaries plus perks to $80,000/year with the rest of the executive staff reduced accordingly. No more millions for the bums that have destroyed both their company and the nation.

Screw the WP and fellow travelers.

[mistertrickster]

15. Pay no attention to countries like Canada, Norway and the Netherlands with a high minimum wage

and one-half to one-third the unemployment we've got.

And faster GDP growth too . . .

[HuckleB]

16. Talk a ludicrous recommendation.

Not a lick of logic involved.

SHEESH!

:mad:

[KamaAina]

17. Why not reduce the minimum wage to zero? Then everyone could be "employed".

:sarcasm:

[slay]

19. Fuck that. Reduce the work week to 35 hrs as full time to encourage hiring more people, but do NOT

cut the minimum wage! People who work for that slave wage amount can barely get by as it is! Fuckers!

[RDANGELO]

20. The most anti family policy in America

The not family supportable minimum wage. You want to see more crime and broken families? Lower the minimum wage.

[jmowreader]

22. Well, you COULD argue that...

Let's see...sweatshop A employs 100 minimum-wage workers making really cheap shit. If the minimum wage goes up by one cent, he has to terminate one worker so his payroll costs won't go up.

We have to disregard things like, if the minimum wage actually DOES go up people will have more money to spend there, hence he will be doing better and may actually be able to HIRE more people. But nope, raising the minimum wage might cut into profits and we can't have that.

And how come we never hear wonderful analyses from these jerkoffs like, "the highest rate of job creation ever in the history of the republic came between 1945 and 1965 when taxes were 90 percent, so if we want job growth we should raise taxes by a LOT."