… Part II – with a bonus “whopper” free of charge.
Today’s climatic advertisement in the Times Standard that will cost No On R a pretty penny purports to address 3 “whoppers”. The previous post attempted to address one of those.
In short, so-called “Whopper #2” is actually true – Measure R WILL help working families. In fact it’s the raison d’etre of Measure R. A purpose that the No On R folks desperately don’t want you to internalize.
On to so called “Whopper #3”: this is the one they say is “the biggest lie they tell”.
No on R disagree that “raising the economy invigorates economies“. They disagree so much that this simple statement is called a whopper and the “biggest lie” we on the left tell.
Hmmm. Seems they are awfully defensive about this contention. Why might that be? Could it be because it’s true and if the electorate figured this out, they would be in a world of hurt politically? Notice how they did not cite a single study the reader could reference in this link-rich world where every study is but a click away?
Here is my brother Ramsey doing a great job using links and stats that in fact higher minimum wages do invigorate economies…
15.6% of workers in Eureka’s congressional district make between $9 and $11.25 per hour. Eureka’s Gini coefficient (its measure of income inequality; higher is worse) is higher than the national average. http://policy-practice.oxfamamerica.org/work/poverty-in-the-us/minimum-wage-map/scorecard/?district=CA-2. That Humboldt has an income inequality problem is something people familiar with Humboldt County know all too well. Increasing minimum wages enriches the entire community by putting more money in the hands of low wage workers and in turn decreasing income inequality. When you put more money in the hands of regular people, they spend it in the community. Any loss in customers to Los Bagels, for instance, might be offset by the additional customers they gain if the restaurant next door puts a few more dollars per hour in its employees’ pockets. In this and other measurable ways (such as studies showing increases in minimum wage actually increase job growthhttp://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/07/03/3456393/minimum-wage-state-increase-employment/) raising the minimum wage benefits the community as a whole. I like to call it trickle up economics. (We tried trickle down and it didn’t work.) Any price model that does not take into account these bigger pieces is missing the forest for the trees.
Neither No On R’s website nor their advertisement gives us reports to back up their contention, but they give a long list of official organizations that they say agree with them, including the GAO, the CBO and the BLS. Hmmm, again, seems a little fishy. If that’s true, why not link to the reports?
A: It’s not important. What is important is for us to simply trust them. Why? Basically because they and the money they’ve collected say so. Oh, also because the left are liars and tell whoppers. QED.
Bonus so called “whopper”… “whopper” #1:
“Whopper” #1 “Measure R Only Hurts Big Box Stores”
No. No one supporting R will say this. Measure R does not hurt Big Box Stores nor does it hurt local business who produce a service or product while maintaining a sustainable business model. Measure R will help both Big Box Stores and local businesses as long as the metric is not limited simply to profits. Well paid employees will be more likely to stick around reducing training, etc. It’s a chance, especially for local businesses to maintain expertise in their businesses. It’s also, as Ramsey points out above, a chance to enrich those most likely to re-invest into the local economy.
But wait, there’s more…
One more special bonus false contention about R. This one care of John Chiv. John condenses his support to the No On R ers to this.
A feel good measure that will achieve nothing to improve the lives of working people; most people who were voting for it because of their intent thinking it would benefit others felt differently when they got the facts. Another ill-intentioned measure designed to stick it to Walmart and “larger businesses”; all it will do is stick it to the people it is supposed to help and drive away the few good employers that do not need legislation to do the right thing.
Other, again, than attacking everyone else in the room other than himself, his candidates and the job creators, John’s argument seems to be raising wages of working people will achieve nothing to improve the lives of working people. I’ll just leave that statement alone allowing it’s inherent paradox stand as it’s own contradictory argument.
John does get one thing right, Measure R is feel good, because it does feel good to have our economic and political system do something for Eureka’s hard working class for once, despite conservatives throwing everything they can against it.