CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
September 15, 2016 10:20 AM UTC
22 Comments
Given that I see Burger King with signs saying: "now hiring, starting at $10/hr", I see minimal economic impact from this proposed increase.
Hopefully, some dishwashers will get raises.
Simple math: if you force wages higher and don't grow income, workers lose their jobs. It's basic economics, which liberals have never heard of.
Fluffy, Ihave a masters degree in economics. You have that three page pamphlet you got from the Koch Brothers.
So, to further your education, Goggle "marginal propensity to consume." I know, thats two big words,but man up, ok.
Then read Keynes, J.M., "The general theory of money and interest."
putting the two together, you learn that wage increases for low-paid workers generate new jobs as they buy things for their families. These new jobs are called the "multiplier effect" and also generate new demand.
Since the Bush crash, the economy has been depressed by lack of consumer demand. A gradual rise to $12 in the minimum wage will increase employment and profits alike. It's called growing the economic pie. Giving workers a decent wage ends up making bigger profits for employers. Socialists and Ayn Rand fantasists both hate that fact. But hard-headed businessmen like Henry Ford knew it was true.
That, fluffy one, really is basic economics. Come back next semester and I'll lecture you on Thorstein Veblen's" Theory of the Leisure Class."
Except that that's never been what happens. Higher wages actually mean higher income (d'uh), there is no evidence that it leads to job loss and it stimulates the whole economy since masses of people with more money spend is great for the economy, great for job creation and great for increased opportunity for upward mobility. That's why the golden age of unions, which turned the masses from low wage earners to good living wage earners was the golden age for middle class expansion, increased middle income earner wealth and upward mobility.
That's basic economics which conservatives still reject in favor of their discredited beliefs (dignifying anything so evidence free by calling it them "theories" would be silly at this point after so many decades of proof that they don't work as advertised) which have never actually panned out in the real world. Take Kansas. Pulease.
Refusing to accept all the evidence that proves that living wages for the masses create healthy prosperous vibrant economies and middle class majorities is of a piece with refusing to believe in science in general.
By now, conservatism has long been less an economic/social/political ideology than a purely faith based religion.
Amen, sister.
That was a much-needed pounding of the conservative philosophy. Blunt and honest. Thank you.
Thank V. He's the one with the masters and the credibility!
Boo hoo! You all have crushed Fluffy's dream of restoring the Feudal economy where Royalty commands by decree, surrounded by their supplicants in the royal court, where serfs toil all day, every day in the fields, for a mere pittance!
It is simple English, Fluffy. How can you pontificate on math when you can't even speak English? Have you ever heard of a preposition? It does not go at the end of a sentence. Please do not lecture us on intellectual matters until you actually possess an intellect.
Thank you, Fluffy.
ummm…. Duke … I hear that it is now considered permissible to end a sentence with a preposition rather than resorting to now antiquated sounding phrasing such as "… of which liberals have never heard". Even for Fluffy.
By whom, if I may inquire?
Among many other sources….
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/grammar/ending-sentences-with-prepositions
http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2011/11/grammar-myths-prepositions/
And may I add….. how dare you question my authoritay? That is something up with which I shall not put! Pistols at dawn?
Particularly when you dealing with an aging pedant who will not participate in the dumbing of America.
Those ready to toss the English language upon the trash heap as a result of the ever increasing laziness of the human tongue (not to mention the brain to which it is attached) are free to do so, as is their wont.
As for me and my house, we will, to the extent possible, continue to comply with tradition and celebrate our Latin roots by eschewing the stranded preposition and scourging transgressors when the sin seems particularly egregious, or the sinner extraordinarily hapless….ahem.. (So in this case I feel perfectly justified..)
Furthermore, m'lady, pistols at dawn seems so traditional…I say, pancakes at 4 AM….
en garde…!
Pancakes…. OK… but 4 AM? As it happens we'll be up earlier than that tomorrow to catch a 6:50 AM flight to my niece's wedding. I don't plan to do it again for another several decades if ever.
And I do, especially in writing, try to avoid ending sentences with prepositions. Old habits die hard and I don't think I ever got less than an A on an essay back in the dark ages when teachers were sticklers for that sort of thing. But sometimes exceptions must be made.
Indeed…safe travels…
To make it even simpler: the less people earn, the higher the percentage they spend of what they do earn. No stocks, bonds or even savings accounts for most of those folks. If they can't afford it, they do without it. When they earn more, they have a long list of things to spend the pay raise on so they can live a little better.
Exactly, Cookie. That's what the rather pompous term "marginal propensity to consume" means in practice. If I give someone earning $1 million a year an extra $100,000 by a tax cut. he will probably invest the money rather than spend it. That would normally be great since business investment also creates new jobs. But right now, businesses are sitting on Trillions of dollars of idle capital because they don't see enough demand to justify expansion. So instead of $100,000 to one rich guy, let's give $1,000 to 100 single moms on minimum wage. They spend it, fixing the transmission on that 06 Ford or buying shoes for their kids. That creates jobs for auto mechanics and shoe salesmen, who in turn buy new suits and homes, creating jobs for tailors and carpenters, etc.
Obviously a higher minimum wage does cost some jobs. No one would seriously argue for a $50 an hour minimum wage now. But if McDonalds lays off a burger chef , that loss is offset by the many minimum wage workers who spend their higher wages, prompting McDonalds and Burger King to add a shift. At a reasonable level, the increase in consumer demand more than offsets the loss of a few marginal jobs. The current minimum wage has been static so long that a gradual rise to $12 should produce considerably more jobs than it costs. And, by definition, the jobs gained will be more productive than the jobs lost, raising medium income levels. Does that mean some rich businesspeople will be even richer with a higher minimum wage? Let's hope so — this is a case of a rising tide truly raising all (or at least most) boats.
BTW, is his name really Fruits?
I think so. It was scarring as a child.
That would be a great stage name for a nightclub performer in Provincetown.
So we now know the Republican economic program is just a nonstop diet of Fruits and nuts!
Maybe this is where fruitcake came from?