Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We need a new Democratic Party [View all]ProSense
(116,464 posts)8. Wait
"Krugman, Stieglitz and the other reality-based economists are persona non grata."
...you think Krugman is "persona non grata"? On what basis?
KRUGMAN: Centrist Pundits "Will Always Invent Some Reason Why Obama Just Isn't Doing It Right"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022453130
Raise That Wage
By PAUL KRUGMAN
President Obama laid out a number of good ideas in his State of the Union address. Unfortunately, almost all of them would require spending money and given Republican control of the House of Representatives, its hard to imagine that happening.
One major proposal, however, wouldnt involve budget outlays: the presidents call for a rise in the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9, with subsequent increases in line with inflation. The question we need to ask is: Would this be good policy? And the answer, perhaps surprisingly, is a clear yes....the current level of the minimum wage is very low by any reasonable standard. For about four decades, increases in the minimum wage have consistently fallen behind inflation, so that in real terms the minimum wage is substantially lower than it was in the 1960s. Meanwhile, worker productivity has doubled. Isnt it time for a raise?
Now, you might argue that even if the current minimum wage seems low, raising it would cost jobs. But theres evidence on that question lots and lots of evidence, because the minimum wage is one of the most studied issues in all of economics. U.S. experience, it turns out, offers many natural experiments here, in which one state raises its minimum wage while others do not. And while there are dissenters, as there always are, the great preponderance of the evidence from these natural experiments points to little if any negative effect of minimum wage increases on employment.
<...>
So Mr. Obamas wage proposal is good economics. Its also good politics: a wage increase is supported by an overwhelming majority of voters, including a strong majority of self-identified Republican women (but not men). Yet G.O.P. leaders in Congress are opposed to any rise. Why? They say that theyre concerned about the people who might lose their jobs, never mind the evidence that this wont actually happen. But this isnt credible...todays Republican leaders clearly feel disdain for low-wage workers. Bear in mind that such workers, even if they work full time, by and large dont pay income taxes (although they pay plenty in payroll and sales taxes), while they may receive benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. And you know what this makes them, in the eyes of the G.O.P.: takers, members of the contemptible 47 percent who, as Mitt Romney said to nods of approval, wont take responsibility for their own lives.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/opinion/krugman-raise-that-wage.html
By PAUL KRUGMAN
President Obama laid out a number of good ideas in his State of the Union address. Unfortunately, almost all of them would require spending money and given Republican control of the House of Representatives, its hard to imagine that happening.
One major proposal, however, wouldnt involve budget outlays: the presidents call for a rise in the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $9, with subsequent increases in line with inflation. The question we need to ask is: Would this be good policy? And the answer, perhaps surprisingly, is a clear yes....the current level of the minimum wage is very low by any reasonable standard. For about four decades, increases in the minimum wage have consistently fallen behind inflation, so that in real terms the minimum wage is substantially lower than it was in the 1960s. Meanwhile, worker productivity has doubled. Isnt it time for a raise?
Now, you might argue that even if the current minimum wage seems low, raising it would cost jobs. But theres evidence on that question lots and lots of evidence, because the minimum wage is one of the most studied issues in all of economics. U.S. experience, it turns out, offers many natural experiments here, in which one state raises its minimum wage while others do not. And while there are dissenters, as there always are, the great preponderance of the evidence from these natural experiments points to little if any negative effect of minimum wage increases on employment.
<...>
So Mr. Obamas wage proposal is good economics. Its also good politics: a wage increase is supported by an overwhelming majority of voters, including a strong majority of self-identified Republican women (but not men). Yet G.O.P. leaders in Congress are opposed to any rise. Why? They say that theyre concerned about the people who might lose their jobs, never mind the evidence that this wont actually happen. But this isnt credible...todays Republican leaders clearly feel disdain for low-wage workers. Bear in mind that such workers, even if they work full time, by and large dont pay income taxes (although they pay plenty in payroll and sales taxes), while they may receive benefits like Medicaid and food stamps. And you know what this makes them, in the eyes of the G.O.P.: takers, members of the contemptible 47 percent who, as Mitt Romney said to nods of approval, wont take responsibility for their own lives.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/opinion/krugman-raise-that-wage.html
The pundits are pissed that Obama won. That...
Health care reform won (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022424843). Wall Street reform won (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022441546). Raising taxes on the rich won (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022409893).
The question is why are you?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
265 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yep, righties complain about the high "rates" of taxes on corporations too...
cascadiance
Mar 2013
#113
Its supposed to include capital gains, federal and state, sales tax, property taxes, etc
bhikkhu
Mar 2013
#67
Capitals gains is the central point, and the bulk of the poolside billionaires' income.
GoneFishin
Mar 2013
#122
Capital gains is a much different rate than income tax, this is alsp the reason Warren Buffett
Thinkingabout
Mar 2013
#123
The top one percent have just experienced the loss of the Bush tax cuts for themselves
fasttense
Mar 2013
#43
That says based on "income". I don't think capital gains is considered income
cui bono
Mar 2013
#192
Catch-22. The people who have the power to change the system are part of the system.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2013
#13
exactly- how long did it take for the scoundrels to pass the (un)patriot act?
green for victory
Mar 2013
#130
We need to fix the voting system first. Wont be able to get campaign finance laws
rhett o rick
Mar 2013
#125
Ratfuckers generally do advocate for a "new" Democratic party. But that's not what you are, right
KittyWampus
Mar 2013
#3
Your reply makes his point. That is a hateful reply aimed at stifling discussion.
rhett o rick
Mar 2013
#224
He's also making the point tha Obama is offering the Republicans what they want.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Mar 2013
#26
The problem 'centrists' face right now is that one Party is offering actual compromise (DNC)
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2013
#198
One that stands for good government, that won't trade long-term stability for today's talking points
bhikkhu
Mar 2013
#20
What'sa Matter Manny, GOP Implosion Getting You Down? U Figure The Dems Need One of Their Own Too?
Skraxx
Mar 2013
#21
Yes they are very welcome here. That is exactly what the OP is doing, defending
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#236
I believe it was you who conducted the purity test on the OP. Since you set yourself
sabrina 1
Mar 2013
#241
Voters did not "reject progressive candidates"--voters rejected candidates who ran lousy campaigns
Lydia Leftcoast
Mar 2013
#225
There was a lot of talk about the Democratic Party throwing elections back then.
Egalitarian Thug
Mar 2013
#261
We need a new Rethug party, too, don't ya think? The GOP we have now is full of criminals.
judesedit
Mar 2013
#47
Uh, not quite. Maybe you missed the letter that many in the progressive caucus won't sign.
Dawgs
Mar 2013
#63
Republican strategy is to spend fast and furious when they are in power, then
GoneFishin
Mar 2013
#157
Almost all our institutions are a complete wreck. I agree that there has to be some beachhead.
TheKentuckian
Mar 2013
#71
What can we do other then go to the streets. I'm already surprised that the people
southernyankeebelle
Mar 2013
#78
I wish we'd make our tent a little smaller and send the conservadems back to the Republican Party
Cleita
Mar 2013
#94
Now it is the Third Way centrists who maintain that both Parties are equally at fault
Bluenorthwest
Mar 2013
#202
You're totally right - Talk is easy; walking the walk is not; get off your asses
pattiepcomedy
Mar 2013
#112
"Manny and posts that attack the President will always get hundreds of recs."
Number23
Mar 2013
#183
I would be great if Dems stopped being moderate Republicans and Republicans
I Cant Dance
Mar 2013
#109
We need the old Democratic Party back. Kick out the damn conservatives. nm
rhett o rick
Mar 2013
#127
Do you have a link showing that both the CBO and the SSA is using ~8% UE rate
I Cant Dance
Mar 2013
#144
Nobody can predict the future, so that argument goes in circles. You oppose lifting the SS cap.
Romulox
Mar 2013
#219
I couldn't agree with you (or Senator Sanders) more. The arguments against are insane. nt
Romulox
Mar 2013
#242
+22,198 and +4 (the number coincidentally that Nader got in New Hampshire)
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#153
I hear you, and I agree. I feel exactly the same about all the political parties here
BelgianMadCow
Mar 2013
#138
This is what happens when the vast majority of the money and power is hoarded by just a few.
w4rma
Mar 2013
#149
I notice 10 hours after this thread started, you just added the following-
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#176
I love your posts. They are highly entertaining. Love conversing with you.
graham4anything
Mar 2013
#179
Issues are too complicated for someone whose first instinct is to compromise to solve
Lydia Leftcoast
Mar 2013
#244
K & R, to be liberal is to want what our forefathers fully intended, to ensure the survival
mother earth
Mar 2013
#228