The Wall Street Journal editorial board pushed long-debunked myths about the minimum wage, misleadingly criticizing the growing support for increasing the minimum wage as economically destructive.
In a December 5 editorial, the Journal criticized President Obama's support of increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour, claiming that the move would harm the economy and the job market. After lamenting the passage of a number of recent state-level minimum wage hikes, The editorial concluded:
Our readers are familiar with the mountains of evidence that minimum wages lead to fewer workers hired. Small minimum-wage hikes have small negative employment effects, but raising a worker's cost by 50% or more risks pricing many low-skilled workers out of the job market.
While the Journal claims that there are "mountains of evidence" that support the claim that minimum wage hikes are harmful to the labor market, it never offers any specific proof about their broader impact. If it had actually looked at the "mountains of evidence" concerning minimum wage hikes, a different picture would emerge.
Research conducted by economists Paul Wolfson of Dartmouth and Dale Belman of Michigan State looked at a variety of studies published on the minimum wage since 2000. While some found negative employment effects and some found positive effects, their analysis concluded that across studies, there are no statistically significant negative hiring effects of increasing the minimum wage.
Furthermore, according to a report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research, while "employment responses generally cluster near zero," the effect of a minimum wage hike on employment is "more likely to be positive than negative."
Of course, nowhere in its editorial did the Journal note the positive effect a minimum wage increase would have on workers. According to the Economic Policy Institute, raising the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour would increase the wages of about 30 million workers, 88 percent of whom are at least 20 years old.
In addition to the benefit of workers receiving higher wages, a minimum wage increase would also help the economy at large. According to the same EPI study, the increased spending power of workers would increase gross domestic product by about $32 billion and create approximately 140,000 jobs.
Flickr Image Via The All-Nite Images.
From the December 5 edition of Courtside Entertainment Group's The Laura Ingraham Show:
From the December 5 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
MICHAEL CANNON: The president has given illegal subsidies to members of Congress to protect them from the harms that Obamacare inflicts on them. He is imposing taxes that the law does not authorize, issuing other subsidies the law does not authorize, and the point that I was making was that we had run through all of these options that you have for restraining an executive, and the point that I was making was that there's this other one, and you don't want to do anything that gives people such nutty ideas. You want to make sure the executive is very faithful to the laws because you don't want to be giving anyone any reason to think that's a good idea.
MARTHA MACCALLUM: Understood. But we, you know, we played your sound bite. I'm not suggesting that you think we are on the verge of revolt. What I'm suggesting is that you're saying that you think that this is such a serious - um, such a serious issue in terms of how this presidency is handling these issues, and the bounds that have been overstepped, that historically, President Lincoln suggested, that when that happens, the American people when they see laws being not upheld by the executive branch, it leaves them to sort of logically conclude that perhaps those laws don't apply to them either and that that can and has historically led to either changing government, and in some very rare cases, revolt.
CANNON: You don't want to do anything that causes the American people to lose faith in the laws.
CANNON: And certainly when the president oversteps his, oversteps his bounds, does things that Congress is not authorized, does not faithfully execute the laws, then that can happen.
This morning, as minimum wage workers in 100 cities around the country went on strike, CNN's New Day, in 90 seconds, demonstrated how to cover issues of poverty.
Watch from 1:10: (Full segment included for context.)
CNN's Alison Kosik deserves credit for reporting the facts about low-wage workers.
Her subject is a 58-year-old man with two college age children who works at Kentucky Fried Chicken, scraping by with a second job at Kennedy Airport -- not a teenager working for spending money -- which is who conservatives claim minimum wage workers are.
"Living on $7.25 -- you cannot do it," he tells Kosik. "You couldn't even pay your apartment, buy food."
She goes on to acknowledge the struggle that fast food workers face in their daily living, pointing out how far their median wages -- even if working full time -- fall below the poverty line for families.
Then she turns to Columbia University Professor Dorian Warren, who studies "inequality and American politics" to explain that workers are not taking these jobs by choice, but because they are "desperate."
Kosik concludes that 6 out of 10 jobs expected to be created in the next decade in fast-growth industries pay low wages, demonstrating the magnitude of the issue.
In contrast, this is how a certain "fair and balanced" network covers workers seeking higher wages: