St. Louis Gave Workers a Wage Hike. Missouri Republicans Are Taking it Away.

[Getin the ring]

Rural area STATES?

That's an excuse, not the problem.

Republicans legislate against these poor red states and districts .. who also happen to be the biggest moochers of federal dollars in the country.

GOP Medicaid cuts to hit rural America hardest, report finds

Medicaid's enrollment has swollen to more than 72 million in recent years, and the ranks of uninsured Americans has fallen to 9% in 2015 from 13% in 2013. That's largely due to the Affordable Care Act, which allowed states to expand Medicaid eligibility with federal funds. Thirty-one states, plus the District of Columbia did so.

Those gains may be in jeopardy under the House GOP health care bill that would replace major parts of the ACA -- known as Obamacare -- and dramatically cut federal funding for Medicaid. The House passed the legislation, the American Health Care Act, in May.

"There is no doubt that children and families in small towns would be disproportionately harmed by cuts to Medicaid," said Joan Alker, executive director of the Georgetown's Center for Children and Families.

Medicaid covered 45% of children and 16% of adults in small towns and rural areas in 2015, according to the center's report. Those figures are lower in metropolitan areas -- 38% of children and 15% of adults.

Rural areas have larger Medicaid populations because more people with disabilities live there, household incomes tend to be lower, unemployment rates higher and jobs with employer-paid insurance less common, the report found.

In states that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare, the rate of uninsured people in small towns and rural areas fell by 11 percentage points between 2008-09 and 2014-15 -- from 22% to 11%, the report said. That was slightly larger than the decrease in metro areas of expansion states.

If the House bill became law, Medicaid would be cut by more than $800 billion over 10 years. That would lead to higher uninsured rates and reduce Americans' access to health care, Alker said.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/07/news/economy/gop-medicaid-rural/index.html

They, REPUBLICANS .. want to take that money from Medicaid and their constituents in their own poor ass states and districts AND GIVE IT TO THEMSELVES.

Same is true of minimum wage increases. They don't want to see it rise because they don't give a fuck about the poor even among their own constituency.

you get stupider by the post,

Every inner city in this country, rife with poverty, bad education systems, drugs, crime you name it are run by Democrats, almost without exception.
I have no clue of what you speak, your blind partisan rhetoric is poison, a liberal can twist anything I suppose, and you are Captain of that ship

 

[Getin the ring]

Throwing out CBO numbers about the impact of healthcare after how bad the CBO missed on Obamacare is like rehiring a babysitter that molested your child.
Obamacare aka the ACA is on life support and you goofs refuse to realize that fact. Talk all you want about how great it is in that it covers more Americans.

if you took my money and fed 20 homeless people for 1 year, but when I stopped you from robbing my account would you villainize me for taking food from the homeless...?
that is exactly what this argument you make is akin to.

 

[blackascoal]

No, Seattle has a vibrant economy even with raising the minimum wage to $15.

Many urban .. democratic controlled .. municipalities are moving to, or working on legislation to increase the minimum wage for workers .. as well as working to ensure those workers and families have healthcare.

 

[blackascoal]

There was a meme that went around a couple of years ago that 97 of the poorest 100 counties in the U.S. were in red states. Polifact did a review of it and almost of the counties are rural (and many are located near Appalachia). There is definitely rural poverty in America just as there is urban poverty however urban poverty gets covered up in the statistics by rich neighbors.

California has the highest poverty rate of any state so what are we doing wrong here?

They, REPUBLICANS .. want to take that money from Medicaid and their constituents in their own poor ass states and districts AND GIVE IT TO THEMSELVES.

Stay focused brother .. start from there.

 

[Granule]

you get stupider by the post,

Every inner city in this country, rife with poverty, bad education systems, drugs, crime you name it are run by Democrats, almost without exception.
I have no clue of what you speak, your blind partisan rhetoric is poison, a liberal can twist anything I suppose, and you are Captain of that ship

First Mate, actually. Evince is Captain.

 

[cawacko]

The name of my song is 'Small Wonder.'

Small wonder why 9 out of the 10 poorest states .. and 97 out of 100 poorest counties in America are all controlled by republicans.

What are the unemployment rates in those poor ass states and districts I wonder .. because according to republicans, they should all be near full employment. .. but they aren't.

Are businesses exploding in these poor ass states and districts .. according to republicans peasant wages creates more business and jobs .. yet they control 90% of poor ass states and 97% of poor ass counties.

Small wonder.

This is what I was responding to BAC. You are speaking of minimum wage and poor countries.

 

[TTQ64]

They, REPUBLICANS .. want to take that money from Medicaid and their constituents in their own poor ass states and districts AND GIVE IT TO THEMSELVES.

Stay focused brother .. start from there.

Red between his lines. He's blaming Blacks (urban) for the poverty in red states..........but he's just to much of a coward to say it.

 

[cawacko]

Red between his lines. He's blaming Blacks (urban) for the poverty in red states..........but he's just to much of a coward to say it.

Actually no i'm not our dear ignorant uneducated friend. There is urban, suburban and rural poverty in America. Rural poverty when judged by statistics doesn't have adjoining wealth that urban poverty does to cover for it in the statistics. I know you are not a fan of facts, or anything intellectual for that matter, so it's ok. We don't blame you.

 

[cawacko]

And we know you don't like to read friend but if you did you might be aware poverty is growing fastest in the suburbs.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

blackascrap, please, think before you speak. Minimum wage at 10.oo vs 7.7o / hr.

2.30 more an hour, 40 hour week you are giving this person another 65 dollars a week after taxes, well aren't you the great savior riding in on the white horse. lololol

Minimum wage jobs were never meant to sustain anyone, minimum wage jobs are meant for either young kids working to make spending money while going to school, or summer jobs.

Anyone trying to live long term off of a minimum wage job, support a family, housing etc. should get a plan B.
The only thing 10 an hour vs 7.70 an hour will do is cause the employer to get rid of a worker or two to make up the difference,
OR
charge me more money for the service / product involved.

like most everything a liberal opines on you are clueless, uninformed, and glaringly reaching for another glass of whine
lololol

The one thing that the supporters of raising the minimum wage never want to discuss, is the following.

Employees A / B / C all came in at the then minimum wage (lets use $7.70 per hour) and after a couple of years of hard work, Employee has is now earning $10.00 per hour and Employees B and C are at $9.50 per hour.

Company now hires Employee D and has to pay him $10.00 per hour.

What happens to Employees A / B / C?
Are they going to have to now pay Employee A $12.30 per hour and Employees B / C $11.70 per hour?

 

[TTQ64]

Actually no i'm not our dear ignorant uneducated friend. There is urban, suburban and rural poverty in America. Rural poverty when judged by statistics doesn't have adjoining wealthy poverty to cover for it in the statistics. I know you are not a fan of facts, or anything intellectual for that matter, so it's ok. We don't blame you.

Right, those racist white liberals always covering for Blacks................rolling my eyes.

 

[cawacko]

Right, those racist white liberals always covering for Blacks................rolling my eyes.

Dear lord...

 

[Getin the ring]

There was a meme that went around a couple of years ago that 97 of the poorest 100 counties in the U.S. were in red states. Polifact did a review of it and almost of the counties are rural (and many are located near Appalachia). There is definitely rural poverty in America just as there is urban poverty however urban poverty gets covered up in the statistics by rich neighbors.

California has the highest poverty rate of any state so what are we doing wrong here?

exactly, you can not reach this character blacka$$coal though, he fell out of a dumbass tree and hit every limb on the way down, the fact is yes there are poor people in every demographic, but the point you and I are trying to make is that it is liberal, Democrat politicians and their liberal policy that is actually keeping down the very folks they claim to be a champion of.
Without exception every major inner city in this country is run by liberal policy, and you look at their plight and tell me. Rural areas of America and the poverty there is driven by an entirely different factor, jobs, or lack thereof.
In the inner cities it's the free pass that keeps self respect from ruling the day. There are plenty of jobs and opportunity if they wanted it.

Democrats got caught, the black vote that turned out to vote affirmative action for Obama, as if their boat had come to dock, took a longer look at the actual politics behind candidate Hillary, and her being white didn't pass their color test so that dispicable bitche$ politics and character took the hit.

 

[blackascoal]

This is what I was responding to BAC. You are speaking of minimum wage and poor countries.

The glaring difference is that democrats advocate and legislate FOR the poor, republicans do the same against the poor.

You skipped right over my bolded comment about republican attempts to rape Medicaid to put the money in their own pockets.

This isn't just about urban vs rural, it's about which party legislates to benefit all workers, including the poor .. a truth that is as obvious as the nose on you face.

 

[anatta]

Medicaid's enrollment has swollen to more than 72 million in recent years,

how do we pay for this on top of the upcoming entitlement crunch? ( remember that ?)

I'm not happy w/ the Dems or the Reps HC plan -the only sane way forward is single pay.
everything else is just a government 'welfare"program- and we don't have the money anymore

 

[cawacko]

The glaring difference is that democrats advocate and legislate FOR the poor, republicans do the same against the poor.

You skipped right over my bolded comment about republican attempts to rape Medicaid to put the money in their own pockets.

This isn't just about urban vs rural, it's about which party legislates to benefit all workers, including the poor .. a truth that is as obvious as the nose on you face.

you choose to equate the intention of legislation as having the highest moral value (caring) rather than the results of said legislation.

 

[blackascoal]

you choose to equate the intention of legislation as having the highest moral value (caring) rather than the results of said legislation.

.. and you make no argument for morality or fairness or equity or anything closely related to benefit to workers. That's not your interests. Your party wants to stick the money in their own pockets and you have nothing to say about that.

Frankly, I'm not sure what your argument is other than you don't like people making more money.

Do you turn down raises? How about no you don't .. but there's a problem when anyone else gets one.

 

[cawacko]

.. and you make no argument for morality or fairness or equity or anything closely related to benefit to workers. That's not your interests. Your party wants to stick the money in their own pockets and you have nothing to say about that.

Frankly, I'm not sure what your argument is other than you don't like people making more money.

Do you turn down raises? How about no you don't .. but there's a problem when anyone else gets one.

I believe you said you are a business owner so I know you know the difference between you giving an employee a raise and the gov't mandating you do it.

As the Seattle report showed those most vulnerable lost hours and pay as a result of the increase. So I don't go to a grocery store and think I hope the cashier isn't making money. What I do know is gov't mandating increases hurt the one's it purports to be helping.

I want people to do well. I understand raising the minimum wage may be well intentioned but we know the results.

(I will say from a governing perspective I'm ok with cities and states taking the initiative to raise the rate to what they feel is appropriate. But the Seattle results speak for themselves.)

 

[blackascoal]

Research Shows Minimum Wage Increases Do Not Cause Job Loss

Extensive research refutes the claim that increasing the minimum wage causes increased unemployment and business closures. (See (extensive) list below.)

The buying power of the minimum wage reached its peak in 1968 at $10.97, adjusting for inflation in 2015 dollars. The unemployment rate went from 3.8% in 1967 to 3.6% in 1968 to 3.5% in 1969. The next time the unemployment rate came close to those levels was after the minimum wage raises of 1996 and 1997.*Business Week*observed in 2001, “Many economists have backed away from the argument that minimum wage [laws] lead to fewer jobs.”

Numerous states raised their minimum wages higher than the federal level during the 1997-2007 period the federal minimum wage remained stuck at $5.15. Research by the Fiscal Policy Institute and others showed that states that raised their minimum wages above the federal level experienced better employment and small business trends than states that did not.

A series of rigorous studies by the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at the University of California, Berkeley, significantly advanced the research on minimum wage employment effects. Minimum Wage Effects Across State Borders compared all neighboring counties in the U.S. located on different sides of a state border with different minimum wage levels between 1990 and 2006 and found no adverse employment effects from higher minimum wages.

The Institute for Research on Labor and Employment’s Spacial Heterogeneity and Minimum Wages: Employment Estimates for Teens Using Cross-State Commuting Zones found “no discernable disemployment effect, even when minimum wage increases lead to relatively large wage changes.” Do Minimum Wages Really Reduce Teen Employment? analyzed the 1990-2009 period (an earlier version analyzed 1990-2007). Carefully controlling for more factors than previous minimum wage studies, the researchers found the answer is no.

In a 2013 report, Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?,*the Center for Economic and Policy Research spotlighted two recent meta-studies analyzing the extensive research conducted since the early 1990s; they conclude that "the minimum wage has little or no discernible effect on the employment prospects of low-wage workers. The most likely reason for this outcome is that the cost shock of the minimum wage is small relative to most firms' overall costs and only modest relative to the wages paid to low-wage workers." The Center report explores varied means of adjustment by employers such as increased worker productivity and diminished wage gap between lower and higher paid employees, noting, "But, probably the most important channel of adjustment is through reductions in labor turnover, which yield significant cost savings to employers."

More recent studies on states and cities with higher minimum wages by the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Center for Economic and Policy Research, Integrity Florida and others cited below continue to show that actual minimum wage increases have not caused job loss.

In the 2015 report, Minimum Wage Policy and the Resulting Effect on Employment, the research institute Integrity Florida observes, "Economists cite several reasons why increases in the minimum wage, which raise employers’ cost, generally do not cost jobs. Increased pay adds money to workers’ pocketbooks and allows them to buy more goods and services, creating higher demand, which in turn requires hiring more workers. The higher wage may make it easier to attract applicants and results in less turnover of workers, lowering costs of employers." They report, "Our examination of employment statistics in states found no evidence of employment loss in states that have increased the minimum wage and more evidence that suggests employment increases faster when there is an increase in the minimum wage."
https://www.businessforafairminimum...-minimum-wage-increases-do-not-cause-job-loss

If democrats are smart, they'll use this during the midterms.

 

[cawacko]

Research Shows Minimum Wage Increases Do Not Cause Job Loss

Extensive research refutes the claim that increasing the minimum wage causes increased unemployment and business closures. (See (extensive) list below.)

The buying power of the minimum wage reached its peak in 1968 at $10.97, adjusting for inflation in 2015 dollars. The unemployment rate went from 3.8% in 1967 to 3.6% in 1968 to 3.5% in 1969. The next time the unemployment rate came close to those levels was after the minimum wage raises of 1996 and 1997.*Business Week*observed in 2001, “Many economists have backed away from the argument that minimum wage [laws] lead to fewer jobs.”

Numerous states raised their minimum wages higher than the federal level during the 1997-2007 period the federal minimum wage remained stuck at $5.15. Research by the Fiscal Policy Institute and others showed that states that raised their minimum wages above the federal level experienced better employment and small business trends than states that did not.

A series of rigorous studies by the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment at the University of California, Berkeley, significantly advanced the research on minimum wage employment effects. Minimum Wage Effects Across State Borders compared all neighboring counties in the U.S. located on different sides of a state border with different minimum wage levels between 1990 and 2006 and found no adverse employment effects from higher minimum wages.

The Institute for Research on Labor and Employment’s Spacial Heterogeneity and Minimum Wages: Employment Estimates for Teens Using Cross-State Commuting Zones found “no discernable disemployment effect, even when minimum wage increases lead to relatively large wage changes.” Do Minimum Wages Really Reduce Teen Employment? analyzed the 1990-2009 period (an earlier version analyzed 1990-2007). Carefully controlling for more factors than previous minimum wage studies, the researchers found the answer is no.

In a 2013 report, Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?,*the Center for Economic and Policy Research spotlighted two recent meta-studies analyzing the extensive research conducted since the early 1990s; they conclude that "the minimum wage has little or no discernible effect on the employment prospects of low-wage workers. The most likely reason for this outcome is that the cost shock of the minimum wage is small relative to most firms' overall costs and only modest relative to the wages paid to low-wage workers." The Center report explores varied means of adjustment by employers such as increased worker productivity and diminished wage gap between lower and higher paid employees, noting, "But, probably the most important channel of adjustment is through reductions in labor turnover, which yield significant cost savings to employers."

More recent studies on states and cities with higher minimum wages by the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Center for Economic and Policy Research, Integrity Florida and others cited below continue to show that actual minimum wage increases have not caused job loss.

In the 2015 report, Minimum Wage Policy and the Resulting Effect on Employment, the research institute Integrity Florida observes, "Economists cite several reasons why increases in the minimum wage, which raise employers’ cost, generally do not cost jobs. Increased pay adds money to workers’ pocketbooks and allows them to buy more goods and services, creating higher demand, which in turn requires hiring more workers. The higher wage may make it easier to attract applicants and results in less turnover of workers, lowering costs of employers." They report, "Our examination of employment statistics in states found no evidence of employment loss in states that have increased the minimum wage and more evidence that suggests employment increases faster when there is an increase in the minimum wage."
https://www.businessforafairminimum...-minimum-wage-increases-do-not-cause-job-loss

If democrats are smart, they'll use this during the midterms.

They ran on it in 2016.