Illinois House & Senate passes 15 $ Minimum wage !

[Shadows]

The Senate voted 30-23 Wednesday evening, a day after the House backed it. The state's minimum wage is $8.25. The proposal would raise it incrementally until 2022. The plan also includes a tax credit for some small businesses.

http://abc7chicago.com/politics/senate-approves-minimum-wage-increase-sends-bill-to-governor/2060063/

[JA]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

[Shadows]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

Yes, but if the legislatures agree on a 15$ one, they have certainly no reason to not pursue this when they have a Dem Governor !

[Nyvin]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

[Gass3268]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

I am looking forward to his Kirking.

[Torie]

I wonder is all the downstate Dems voted for this, where wages are lower, and the cost of living is lower. In NY, the NYC metro area has a 15 dollar minimum wage over time, but upstate it is $12.50 as the cap. Having a too high minimum wage is a good way to increase unemployment, and put more rural areas in economic distress at an even greater economic disadvantage.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

Cook county should pass this on their own. Living on something like $8/hr is untenable in Cook County, but much more possible (if less than ideal) in places like Bloomington-Normal or Peoria. My ideal would be a statewide minimum of $12/hr by 2022, with Cook going for $15-$16/hr by 2022.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

[Badger]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

[Badger]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

[muon2]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

One House Dem gave a blistering speech on that point. He noted the many times over the previous four years when a minimum wage bill could have been passed. There was the last two years of Quinn's term when Dems controlled everything. There was the first two years of Rauner's term when Dems held a veto-proof majority. He noted that there were bills filed, but never called in both chambers.

[Badger]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

One House Dem gave a blistering speech on that point. He noted the many times over the previous four years when a minimum wage bill could have been passed. There was the last two years of Quinn's term when Dems controlled everything. There was the first two years of Rauner's term when Dems held a veto-proof majority. He noted that there were bills filed, but never called in both chambers.

But is there any doubt whatsoever this'll pass with a Democratic governor? It's not like the bill will suddenly get shelved or even scaled back if Rauner loses.

If Rauner wants to truly neuter the Democrats "playing politics", he merely has to sign the bill. The Democrats will be robbed of a big campaign issue, and Rauner will prove he's not an ideologue.

If he doesn't? Well, politicians getting voted out when they make decisions that the large majority of voters believe are a bad idea is kind of the definition of "politics"--or rather democracy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but  rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

Have you taken economics before , when the price floor is above the equilibrium unemployment increases

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Nice! Hope Rauner sees the light and signs this.

[Badger]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but  rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

Have you taken economics before , when the price floor is above the equilibrium unemployment increases

That's the theory in Econ 101, but if you ever took higher level classes you'd know that rarely materializes in reality because the increased purchasing power of higher paid workers increases consumption, and thus production, and thus employment.

[Nyvin]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but  rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

Have you taken economics before , when the price floor is above the equilibrium unemployment increases

Illinois' unemployment rate is 5.7%...I doubt that's going to be a big concern.

[muon2]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

One House Dem gave a blistering speech on that point. He noted the many times over the previous four years when a minimum wage bill could have been passed. There was the last two years of Quinn's term when Dems controlled everything. There was the first two years of Rauner's term when Dems held a veto-proof majority. He noted that there were bills filed, but never called in both chambers.

But is there any doubt whatsoever this'll pass with a Democratic governor? It's not like the bill will suddenly get shelved or even scaled back if Rauner loses.

If Rauner wants to truly neuter the Democrats "playing politics", he merely has to sign the bill. The Democrats will be robbed of a big campaign issue, and Rauner will prove he's not an ideologue.

If he doesn't? Well, politicians getting voted out when they make decisions that the large majority of voters believe are a bad idea is kind of the definition of "politics"--or rather democracy.

The point of the House Dem was that the Dem leaders don't want this for the whole state and it is a charade (Chicago has already enacted one to reach $13/hour by 2019). They won't let it get to a Dem gov's desk. The Dem leaders don't want it since it would make the minimum wage double what it is in IA, IN or MO where there has been significant competition with IL for jobs, particularly since the recession. With a difference that large the impact would not be only on minimum wage jobs but on jobs at $10 or $12/hour, too.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but  rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

Have you taken economics before , when the price floor is above the equilibrium unemployment increases

That's the theory in Econ 101, but if you ever took higher level classes you'd know that rarely materializes in reality because the increased purchasing power of higher paid workers increases consumption, and thus production, and thus employment.

Yes for 10.50 dollars and maybe even 11.50 but 15 no way .

[JA]

These votes were largely symbolic, considering they already knew Governor Rauner would veto it and they do not have the votes to override a veto.

That's exactly the point.   The Dems are setting this up to be an attack on Rauner in the midterms.

One House Dem gave a blistering speech on that point. He noted the many times over the previous four years when a minimum wage bill could have been passed. There was the last two years of Quinn's term when Dems controlled everything. There was the first two years of Rauner's term when Dems held a veto-proof majority. He noted that there were bills filed, but never called in both chambers.

But is there any doubt whatsoever this'll pass with a Democratic governor? It's not like the bill will suddenly get shelved or even scaled back if Rauner loses.

If Rauner wants to truly neuter the Democrats "playing politics", he merely has to sign the bill. The Democrats will be robbed of a big campaign issue, and Rauner will prove he's not an ideologue.

If he doesn't? Well, politicians getting voted out when they make decisions that the large majority of voters believe are a bad idea is kind of the definition of "politics"--or rather democracy.

The point of the House Dem was that the Dem leaders don't want this for the whole state and it is a charade (Chicago has already enacted one to reach $13/hour by 2019). They won't let it get to a Dem gov's desk. The Dem leaders don't want it since it would make the minimum wage double what it is in IA, IN or MO where there has been significant competition with IL for jobs, particularly since the recession. With a difference that large the impact would not be only on minimum wage jobs but on jobs at $10 or $12/hour, too.

That was essentially the point I was making by noting this vote was merely symbolic. If/when Rauner is defeated by a Democrat, they will have no intentions of pushing a $15/hour minimum wage for the state. It is similar to how Republicans could vote so easily for repeal of the ACA under President Obama, but under President Trump, it turned into a disaster.

Besides, based on my (admittedly limited) research conducted on the minimum wage for a research project at my university, once the minimum wage surpasses 40% of the average wage, unemployment (especially for low-skilled workers) increases. The best study for this was performed in Poland, which showed the national uniform minimum wage had no notable effect on employment in Poland's more developed socioeconomic regions, but had an adverse effect on low-skilled employment in the country's less socioeconomically developed ones. The difference between the Chicago metro and the rest of the state is too significant for a uniform increase in the state minimum wage without causing harm to low-skilled workers - especially outside of the Chicago metro.

[muon2]

Hopefully it gets vetoed , as 15 dollar min wage would be terrible for the economy.

Beeeecause......?

Besides, let's not forget as is usually the case with these measures: This is phased in over the course of the next several years, not overnight.

Because the price floor will still likely be above the equilibrium

Which is the point of minimum wage laws. If one wishes to reduce our economy even closer to, say, Guatemala's, where full time labor can't provide even the most basic essentials of food, clothing and shelter, then yes it's a terrible idea.

If one believes the economy's biggest problem isn't the lack of available capital to invest in open widget factories, but  rather the lack of consumer wealth and spending power to purchase enough widgets to sustain those factories, it's a blooming great idea.

Have you taken economics before , when the price floor is above the equilibrium unemployment increases

That's the theory in Econ 101, but if you ever took higher level classes you'd know that rarely materializes in reality because the increased purchasing power of higher paid workers increases consumption, and thus production, and thus employment.

Yes for 10.50 dollars and maybe even 11.50 but 15 no way .

This IL Pub agreed with your thinking that it should be raised, but not to $15.
https://youtu.be/t1KfOfKHwNc

He certainly agreed with my thinking from last year.

I find the inflationary aspect of this issue to be fascinating. In the 2013 SOTU Obama called for the federal minimum wage to rise to $9.00 by 2015. In 2014 Obama called for it to rise to $10.10 and backed it up with a federal order for $10.10 effective in 2015. That's 12% inflation in one year for the President's request.

Later in 2015 Seattle passes it's increase in the minimum wage starting at $11 in 2015 and rising to $15 in 2019. $15 seems to be the rallying cry, but note that's a 67% increase over Obama's original request. Furthermore these increases become adjusted for inflation after they reach their target. So presumably that target should make some economic sense.

CNN/Money has an interactive graph of the inflation adjusted federal minimum wage. Its peak was in 1968 at $10.68 in 2015 dollars. Between 1961 and 1980 the inflation adjusted minimum wage was between $7.67 and $10.68. Only one year was under $8.00 and only two over $10.00. The median during those 20 years was $9.28. I was even a minimum wage earner during part of that period.

After the 2014 SOTU I looked up the federal data on the positive impact of minimum wage based on additional money spent by those wage earners vs the negative impact based on money lost due to job losses. The break even point in 2013 was about $9.00 which is consistent with the high range from the 1960's and 70's. Accounting for inflation since 2013 would put the point at $9.16.

The two pieces of actual economic data suggest that the federal minimum wage ought to be around $9.25. That's actually very much in agreement with Obama's original request in 2013. It's also reasonable to expect that localities with high costs of living might also have a higher minimum wage. I'd just rather see it derived from actual economic studies rather than a gut feeling for what is right.

[dead0man]

I wonder is all the downstate Dems voted for this, where wages are lower, and the cost of living is lower. In NY, the NYC metro area has a 15 dollar minimum wage over time, but upstate it is $12.50 as the cap. Having a too high minimum wage is a good way to increase unemployment, and put more rural areas in economic distress at an even greater economic disadvantage.

the people pushing for high minimum wages tend to strongly dislike poor rural areas/people.  These facts you mention are just icing on the cake.

[Shadows]

Why are people coming with pre-historic talking points. 15 is phased in till 2024 (national Senate version not Illinois). 15$ in 2024 is 13$ today & if you look at 1968 data & apply inflation, it is already close to 11.

Minimum wage is going to increase wages for everyone in the bottom segment, people earning just above minimum wage. It is going to save federal subsidies but most of all is a big economic boost. It will put a lot of money in the hands of people who will go & spend. And they have a much higher Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) than say a billionaire & this will determine the consumption function (C) of GDP & GDP multiplier.

The main key is that Minimum Wage increase is a massive net boost in jobs & economic growth & as long as it is increased in phases, it won't cause major problems. And, anyways Corbyn in UK proposed tax credits for small businesses along with increase in minimum wage which could be looked into if there is any problem with small businesses (which is unlikely). You take the increase in tax (due to higher wages) + Less Federal Subsidies = Pump it as Tax Credits to Small businesses !

[Famous Mortimer]

I think the rural/urban divide is overplayed here. There are lots and lots of small businesses in Chicago and other major cities that couldn't afford a $15 minimum wage, mostly immigrant owned businesses. They will either sink with the rural small businesses or be exempt along with the rural small businesses.

[RINO Tom]

Nice! Hope Rauner sees the light and signs this.

There are places in Downstate Illinois that probably can't handle a $15 minimum wage like Chicago can, but  them, right?