Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

CNN to handle it's "Russia Coverage" differently after "fake news" article made it on-line: http://nypost.com/2017/06/25/cnn-is-...-cover-russia/

This comes a few weeks after Comey directly shit on the NYT report that Trump's boys had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/u...ons-trump.html

Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.): ?So again, so the American people can understand this, that report by the New York Times was not true. Is that a fair statement??

James Comey: ?In the main, it was not true. Again, all of you know this, maybe the American people don?t, the challenge, and I?m not picking on reporters, about writing on classified information is the people talking about it often don?t really know what?s going on and those of us who know what?s going on are not talking about it, and we don?t call the press to say, ?Hey, you got that thing wrong about this sensitive topic.? You have to leave it there.?

[Jeff Buchanan]

CNN to handle it's "Russia Coverage" differently after "fake news" article made it on-line: http://nypost.com/2017/06/25/cnn-is-...-cover-russia/

This comes a few weeks after Comey directly shit on the NYT report that Trump's boys had repeated contacts with Russian intelligence: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/u...ons-trump.html

Has the Donald tweeted on this yet?

Perfect opportunity for him to be "vindicated."

[iam416]

You'll need to ask DSL. I'm sure he's tweeting up a shitstorm after Supreme Court decided to hear travel ban case.

[iam416]

Very interesting "working paper" from the University of Washington on the effects of the minimum wage hike in Washington: https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/f...ng%20Paper.pdf

The researchers had access to considerable date from the State. The question with minimum wage is always as wages go up, how much will hours go down? They summarize their finding in the abstract, but I'd recommend reading the whole thing.

From this paper, it's appears that roughly $11/hr has a net-neutral on total payroll, but as it goes up toward $13/hr total payroll actually declines. There are passable policy arguments that go both ways, but this paper does a nice job of actually laying out effects.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Very interesting "working paper" from the University of Washington on the effects of the minimum wage hike in Washington: https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/f...ng%20Paper.pdf

The researchers had access to considerable date from the State. The question with minimum wage is always as wages go up, how much will hours go down? They summarize their finding in the abstract, but I'd recommend reading the whole thing.

From this paper, it's appears that roughly $11/hr has a net-neutral on total payroll, but as it goes up toward $13/hr total payroll actually declines. There are passable policy arguments that go both ways, but this paper does a nice job of actually laying out effects.

Lol. I was wondering how long it would take for you to post this. . I didn't read this report, or last weeks report from UC Berkeley that came to a different top line conclusion.

I can tell you restaurants are opening at a rapid clip and Seattle has record low unemployment.

[iam416]

You should read it. It's comprehensive. FYI, they found zero impact on restaurant jobs...consistent with other studies.

[iam416]

Just took a quick look at Berkeley thing. That study focused on the restaurant industry and elimination of jobs. It found that there were no job cuts in that sector, and accords with the UW study. The UW study went further than merely looking at a single sector or simply looking at jobs. It looozed at all sectors and focused on total hours.

So, you know, you should read it if you're at all interested in the topic.

[froot loops]

CBO score nearly as bad, 22 million out of luck. 15 million by next year.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Talent, I am sure I should read it. I'll add it to the list of things I should do but won't.

Fwiw, I'm not a huge minimum wage guy (one way or the other). I just think the cries from both sides are ridiculous. I think it's fair to say that it wasn't life changing either way. .

[AlabamAlum]

Loooozed?

[Dr. Strangelove]

Interesting

[Dr. Strangelove]

Susan Collins announces she's a no on the health bill.

I was incorrect before...ROn Johnson, though he signed a letter with Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, opposes the bill from the LEFT.

So that's Ron Johnson, Susan Collins, and Dean Heller opposing the bill from the left/center and Cruz, Paul, and Mike Lee opposing it from the conservative right. Not to say that any could change their minds and that these are just starting positions. Seems a tough spot to get a bill passed by Thursday though.

Other squishy Republicans could be Lisa Murkowski, Rob Portman, Jeff Flake, Ben Sasse, Bill Cassidy, maybe McCain. Pat Toomey just got reelected (by under 2%) else he might be hesitant also.

[froot loops]

Murkowski was just on CNN heavily emphasizing Alaska, look for an Alaska kickback for her. Portman will secure some fig leaf for opioid treatment that is totally inadequate.

[Dr. Strangelove]

[ame]https://twitter.com/AliceOllstein/status/879458283475619840[/ame]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Murkowski was just on CNN heavily emphasizing Alaska, look for an Alaska kickback for her. Portman will secure some fig leaf for opioid treatment that is totally inadequate.

Murkowski was wishy-washy but said she wouldn't vote for the present bill. So that's 7.

Rand Paul, Collins, Heller, and now Ron Johnson say that will vote no on a motion to proceed this week. Meaning as it stands McConnell can't even hold a vote. But tomorrow is another day.