Seattle’s Minimum Wage Hike Hurts Workers
“Seattle’s minimum wage increased to $20.76 per hour”
https://reason.com/2025/01/06/seattles-minimum-wage-hike-hurts-workers/
Tag: policy
Trump’s (Un)strategic Crypto Reserve
“Economist Peter C. Earle, the director of economics and economic freedom at the American Institute for Economic Research, tells Reason that referring to Trump’s proposal to acquire vast amounts of cryptocurrency as a “strategic reserve” is “misleading first and foremost because traditional strategic reserves…like the strategic petroleum reserve [and] China’s strategic pork reserve are basically…repositories where large amounts of commodities are held [that] serve economic and security functions.” No cryptocurrency serves a security function, and only two, bitcoin and cardano, could plausibly serve the economic role since their supply is algorithmically constrained, explains Earle. Instead, the federal government committing itself to purchasing cryptocurrency would put a “floor under crypto values” and would function as a “sort of soft subsidy.””
https://reason.com/2025/03/05/trumps-unstrategic-crypto-reserve/
Public housing didn’t fail in the US. But it was sabotaged.
“the demise of public housing was not an inevitable outcome. As my colleague Rachel Cohen has pointed out, other countries have successfully pulled it off. Governments around the world have shown that they can operate mixed-income housing developments that have reliable maintenance and upkeep and that public housing doesn’t have to segregate poor people away from the middle class.
So why did public housing in the United States age so poorly?”
…
“efforts to undermine public housing are about as old as the efforts to build it. From the outset, opposition was fierce. Many Americans didn’t like the idea of the government using their tax dollars to subsidize poor people’s housing, and real estate developers were concerned about having to compete with the government.
The Housing Act of 1949, which had a goal of providing “a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family,” bolstered America’s public housing plans by heavily investing in the construction of new housing units. But by then, the federal government had already undermined its own stated plans by capping construction costs (which encouraged using cheap materials and discouraged modern appliances) and allowing racial segregation. Congress had also doomed public housing authorities’ ability to raise revenue through rents in 1936 when it passed the George-Healey Act, which established income limits for who can qualify for public housing — making mixed-income public housing models impossible for federally funded projects.
As housing projects started to draw more Black residents, white people who lived in public housing started leaving, especially after the Civil Rights Acts of the 1960s banned racial discrimination in housing. This was partly because the Federal Housing Authority pushed for more people to own homes and expanded its loans mostly to white people, helping white families move out of the projects. Black families didn’t receive the same opportunity.
“You saw a change in the racial composition, which simply added to the stigma and the pattern of administrative neglect that characterized many housing authorities,” the historian Ed Goetz told The Atlantic in 2015.
Starting with President Richard Nixon — who declared that the US government had turned into “the biggest slumlord in history” and suspended federal spending on subsidized housing — public housing started facing serious austerity measures and never recovered. Federal investments shifted away from building new public housing units and toward housing vouchers and public-private partnerships.
In the decades that followed, public housing started declining in quality, and Congress funded a program to demolish dilapidated public housing units and replace them with newly constructed or renovated mixed-income developments. But according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, those demolitions were an “overcorrection”; public housing simply needed more funding and better management.”
https://www.vox.com/policy/390082/public-housing-america-policy-failure-poverty
Medicare Advantage: Good? Or Bad? LC Sources
Medicare Advantage: Good? Or Bad? LC Sources
No, California’s $20 Minimum Wage for Fast-Food Workers Did Not Create Jobs
“If minimum wage increases were a drug, governments would have to conduct trials and monitor adverse effects afterward. That’s what happened in Seattle when it raised the minimum wage in 2014. The city called for proposals to study the impact on actual workers earning below the minimum before the law. The Evans School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Washington was the only volunteer. Its researchers found that the law didn’t cause an increase in layoffs among workers who had previously earned below minimum wage, but it did reduce their hours by an average of 7 percent. That was partly offset by a 3 percent increase in hourly pay for the hours they did work. On net, the law cost these workers an average of $888 per year.
That amount is significant in itself, but it’s important to consider that it accounts for only the short-term effects. As mentioned above, some layoffs and hour reductions will happen immediately, but others—such as more businesses closing and fewer opening, or automation and other changes reducing employment—can take years. Another point is that the workers who benefited from higher pay were the ones most likely to have risen out of the minimum wage ranks to the middle class even without a mandated increase, while the workers who lost much more than $888 per year are more likely to be the ones blocked forever from economic advancement. In fact, the paper found that the workers who benefitted net were the most experienced and highest paid among the group–earning more than the old minimum but less than the new–while the less-experienced workers earning the old minimum or close to it, lost considerably more than the average.
Seattle legislators must have been unhappy with those findings because they cut funding for the Evans School and reached out to the same group at U.C. Berkeley that did the California minimum wage study to do its own distorted analysis, which was rushed out a week before the Evans study was made public. Eventually, Seattle raised the minimum wage again.”
https://reason.com/video/2024/12/19/no-californias-20-minimum-wage-for-fast-food-workers-did-not-create-jobs/
Trump signs 4 new executive orders, transforming military
“The new orders prevent transgender people from openly serving in the military, greenlight the process of developing a missile defense shield to protect the U.S., and reinstate service members that voluntarily left or were forced out of the military over COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
Trump also penned an expected executive order that would “abolish” every diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) office within the DOD and Department of Homeland Security, the latter of which houses the U.S. Coast Guard.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-signs-4-executive-orders-125635519.html
What to know about the Laken Riley Act
“The new law will require the detention of undocumented immigrants accused of certain crimes such as theft. Federal immigration officials have warned it could impact 60,000 people.”
…
“ICE warned Congress that the Laken Riley Act could require detention for 60,000 people, and that the agency would need billions of dollars and thousands more detention beds to comply with the law, Axios reported.”
…
“The federal government has prioritized deporting immigrants with criminal records since the Obama administration”
…
“Study after study has indicated that immigrants — those in the U.S. legally or undocumented — commit crimes at lower rates than U.S. citizens, Axios’ Russell Contreras reports.”
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/29/laken-riley-act-what-to-know-trump-immigration-law
The L.A. Fires Are a Natural Disaster, Not a Policy Disaster
“In some contexts, those policies do make the damage done by wildfires worse. They’ll certainly complicate Los Angeles’ recovery efforts.
But the connection between bad land use, insurance, and environmental regulations and the damage done by the current Los Angeles fires to people and property is more tenuous.
On closer inspection, this appears to be a severe natural disaster with natural causes. Bad public policy has played only a marginal role.”
…
“there’s also only so much fuels reduction can do to reduce wildfire risk in the conditions that led to Los Angeles’ current fires: exceptionally strong seasonal Santa Ana winds that reached hurricane levels of intensity.
“If you have strong winds, embers fly away miles ahead of the fire,” says Carmignani. Clearing a few hundred yards here or there can provide firefighters with areas to operate. But it isn’t going to stop the fire from spreading to new areas when winds are that high.
If the four-lane Pacific Coast Highway wasn’t enough of a fire break to prevent beachside Malibu homes from burning down, one wonders what would be.”
https://reason.com/2025/01/14/the-l-a-fires-are-a-natural-disaster-not-a-policy-disaster/
Trump’s ‘External Revenue Service’ Is a Public Relations Effort. It Won’t Change How Tariffs Work.
“Any new tariffs imposed by the incoming Trump administration will function the same way as every other tariff: It will drain wealth from American consumers and businesses to enrich the U.S. Treasury. That’s what tax increases do, even when they are proposed by a Republican president and cheered by a crowd of Republican lawmakers, donors, and administration officials.
Indeed, study after study after study has found that the tariffs Trump levied during his first tenure were paid nearly entirely by American consumers and businesses.”
…
“The big change Trump is proposing this time around is the creation of a new “External Revenue Service” that will collect tariff revenue. The exact contours of that new agency are still unclear, but it is probably best thought of as a public relations maneuver rather than a meaningful policy change. After all, there’s already a governmental entity that handles tariff collection—that’s the “customs” in U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Changing the name won’t change anything about the transactions that occur.”
https://reason.com/2025/01/20/trumps-external-revenue-service-is-a-public-relations-effort-it-wont-change-how-tariffs-work/
Trump Must Choose: Tariffs or Lower Prices
“Trump told reporters Monday night that he’s thinking of imposing tariffs of up to 25 percent on Mexican and Canadian goods. The Peterson Institute for International Economics recently published a study finding that such tariffs “would slow growth and accelerate inflation in all three countries.”
Though the details of Trump’s tariffs remain uncertain, he promised in his inauguration speech to establish an “External Revenue Service [ERS] to collect all tariffs, duties, and revenues,…massive amounts of money” from foreign sources. The Secretary of the Treasury was directed to establish the ERS on Monday night by the America First Trade Policy order. Howard Lutnick, Trump’s pick to run the Commerce Department, said that “the External Revenue Service will put up tariffs, or walls that protect you.” They will do just the opposite.
As Reason’s Eric Boehm explains, “The tariffs Trump levied during his first tenure were paid nearly entirely by American consumers and businesses.” Trump has to choose: Complement his deregulatory agenda with free trade policies that decrease the price of consumer goods, manufacturing, and production, or hinder them with protectionism that benefits select industries at the expense of the American people. Let’s hope the president chooses the former.”
https://reason.com/2025/01/21/trump-must-choose-tariffs-or-lower-prices/