Imagine That … CBO Says Raising the Minimum Wage will Cost From 500,000 to 1,000,000 Jobs

What a shocker, President Barack Obama’s minimum wage economic policies look to destroy more jobs …

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report on the economic effects of Barack Obama’s proposal to increase the minimum wage from its present $7.25 per hour to $10.10. The CBO looked at two options. One,  raise the minimum wage in three steps to $10.10 by 2016, and Two, raise it in two steps to $9.00 by 2016. In either option, the US economy either loses some jobs or many jobs, but make no mistake, they will lose jobs. The CBO announced that an increase in the minimum wage will cost between 500,000 and one million jobs. Basically, Obama and Democrats boasting about raising the minimum wage is nothing more than a distraction to their current political nightmare.

Well this does not fit the Obama/Democrat Talking points …

Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects (see the table below). As with any such estimates, however, the actual losses could be smaller or larger; in CBO’s assessment, there is about a two-thirds chance that the effect would be in the range between a very slight reduction in employment and a reduction in employment of 1.0 million workers.

As summed up by the PJ Tatler, the report in that there is one positive impact to raising the minimum wage, although one groups silver lining is another’s silver bullet. Is it really worth raising some out of poverty at the expense of even more people losing their jobs completely?

The CBO does find one positive impact: Raising the minimum wage would move some 900,000 Americans out of poverty.

But that would come at the cost of potentially sending a million workers out of jobs altogether. That’s hardly the goal that Obama and the Democrats are selling.

The Washington Times discusses Three ways that the CBO contradicts Obama on minimum wage. Imagine that, Obama lying?

1. Obama: “The opponents of the minimum wage have been using the same arguments for years, and time and again they’ve been proven wrong. Raising the minimum wage is good for business, and it’s good for workers, and it’s good for the economy.”
2. Obama: “Rais[ing] the federal minimum wage to $10.10 wouldn’t just raise wages for minimum-wage workers, its effect would lift wages for about 28 million Americans.”
3. Obama: Raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour, “would lift millions of Americans out of poverty immediately.”

I have to ask the following parting question: How is it that Obama and his minions can tell us what the positive benefits will be to raising the minimum wage, but they can’t tell us to the person how many are 100% enrolled in Obamacare and have paid their first premiun when the data is on a database in front of them?

Buyers Remorse: Economist/YouGov.com Poll Finds that Only 79% of Obama Voters Given a Do-Over Would Vote for Him Again, 71% Would Vote For Someone Else

American Voters Want a Mulligan on the 2014 Presidential Election … How’s that “Hopey-Changey” stuff working out for you America?

According to a recent The Economist/YouGov.com poll, 71% of Obama voters are now inclined to vote for somebody else and “regret” their vote to reelect the president. If the election were rerun today, Obama would lose and Mitt Romney would be president. Oh, if only!!! It is too bad that so many Americans did not see what so many on the Right saw in Obama. However, for some bizarre and uninformed reason they were willing to give this failed president a second term. Now we know that if Americans had known the obvious, Obama would have lost badly in 2014.

Sadly, we do not get a do-over and are stuck with this failed president until 2016.

These fools actually thought my political pre-election rhetoric was the truth, ah, ha, ha, ha

Amazing data from the polling sample:

• 80% of whites said yes, 61% of blacks said no and 100% of Hispanics said yes.
• 84% of women said yes, and just 61% of men agreed.
• 55% of Democrats said yes, as did 71% of independents.

Given a chance to do it all over again, only 79 percent of those who voted for President Obama would vote for him again and 71 percent of Obama voters now inclined to vote for somebody else “regret” their vote to reelect the president, according to a new poll.

The Economist/YouGov.com poll found that Obama would lose enough votes in a rematch with Mitt Romney that the Republican would win. “90 percent of people who voted for Romney would do it again, compared to only 79 percent of Obama voters who would,” said the poll.

“Clearly Romney fares better, although he had fewer voters to begin with. As a proportion of the voters each of them actually received in 2012 (66 million for Obama and 61 million for Romney), the GOP candidate ends up with 55 million votes retained to Obama’s 52 million. Not exactly a wipeout. It’s also unclear for any poll that hypothetically revisits 2012 how much it says about renewed hope for Mitt Romney – who has notably been liberated from the scrutiny of a presidential campaign ­– rather than about dissatisfaction with an incumbent president who has spent the last year defending his administration over leaks, scandals and Obamacare roll-outs,” added the poll.

The GOP might want to take notice of the 100% Hispanic vote that regret their vote from above before they continue to bend over backwards and PO their base with amnesty.

Democrats Courting the Felony Vote … Atty Gen. Eric Holder Urges States to Lift Bans on Felons’ Voting

Obama administration looks to get the “felon” vote …

Hmm, do you think those that would abduct and abuse a child the right to vote? Do you think child rapists should have the right to vote? Do you think that child murderers should have the right to vote? Do you think individuals who would partake in the human and sex trafficking of minors and adults should have the right to vote? Do you think an individual that would physically assault a woman, rape and molest a woman and murder a woman the right to vote? Barack Obama’s AG Eric Holder does. So who really has a war on woman and children?

Why would anyone want a man like convicted child rapist Eric Bradley  or anyone like him who had the ability to be paroled, a commuted sentence or serving time the right yo vote ever!!!

Convicted Child rapist Eric Bradly

Imagine this, Attorney General Eric Holder is urging states to lift bans on laws that make it illegal for felons to vote. Of course this has nothing to do with the studies that show that felons who have been denied the right to vote were far more likely to have voted for Democrats than for Republicans. Of course Holder has no authority to change such law as this is a State’s right to pass their own voting laws, but far be it from the Obama administration to over-extend their Constitutional authority. This request by Holder is most likely a non-starter and going nowhere, but that will not stop Holder and the Obama administration to use another issue to be divisive along racial lines. This is just more gutter politics from the Obama administration looking to scrape up any vote they can from the bottom of the barrel.

Really? We do not have voter ID laws in the United States to make sure that there is not voter fraud going on in elections, but instead Eric Holder wants to allow felons to vote after they have served their sentence. Truth be told, he probably would not care if they had the right to vote while they were serving time in prison. Its an Obama world.

Hmm, Holder wants felons to vote but thought the above NBPP thugs did nothing wrong with voter intimidation

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. called Tuesday for the repeal of laws that prohibit millions of felons from voting, underscoring the Obama administration’s determination to elevate issues of criminal justice and race in the president’s second term and create a lasting civil rights legacy.

In a speech at Georgetown University, Mr. Holder described today’s prohibitions — which in some cases bar those convicted from voting for life — as a vestige of the racist policies of the South after the Civil War, when states used the criminal justice system to keep blacks from fully participating in society.

“Those swept up in this system too often had their rights rescinded, their dignity diminished, and the full measure of their citizenship revoked for the rest of their lives,” Mr. Holder said. “They could not vote.”

Mr. Holder has no authority to enact the changes he called for, given that states establish the rules under which people can vote. And state Republican leaders made clear that Mr. Holder’s remarks, made to a receptive audience at a civil rights conference, would not move them.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Tuesday urged states to repeal laws that prohibit felons from voting, a move that would restore the right to vote to millions of people.

The call was mostly symbolic — Mr. Holder has no authority to enact these changes himself — but it marked the attorney general’s latest effort to eliminate laws that he says disproportionately keep minorities from the polls. “It is unwise, it is unjust, and it is not in keeping with our democratic values,” Mr. Holder said at civil rights conference at Georgetown University. These laws deserve to be not only reconsidered, but repealed.”

African-Americans represent more than a third of the estimated 5.8 million people who are prohibited from voting, according to the Sentencing Project, a research group that favors more liberal sentencing policies. And in Florida, Kentucky, and Virginia, more than one in five African-Americans has lost the right to vote.

Is Barack Obama Really Make Income Inequality a Main Topic at SOTU Address When it Has Increased Under his Presidency? Income Gap Widened Under Obama

Like everything Barack Obama has touched or claims he wants to make better, has become worse under his presidency …

The Divider in Chief Barack Obama is back to his old games of blaming the rich for the evils of society. What else is Obama going to do when he is an abject failure who has only made matters worse since he has been in office? Obama rails about income inequality and that it is the worse problem of out time, yet he is responsible for making the gap wider. From the president who makes class warfare part of his daily agenda and who claims he is for the common man, while demonizing the rich, Barack Obama has widened the income gap during his presidency turning the gap into a canyon.

Click on pic to watch VIDEO of the income gap under Obama

Income inequality — the gap between the rich and poor — is an issue U.S. presidents of both parties have spoken of for years.

President Clinton touted, toward the end of his term, that wages were rising “at all income levels” for the first time in decades. President George W. Bush, toward the end of his, pondered the best way to respond to income inequality, noting some policies “lift people up” and some “tear others down.”

But perhaps no president has hammered the issue as emphatically as President Obama.

In his 2012 State of the Union address, Obama said: “The defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. No challenge is more urgent. No debate is more important. We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”

But a look back shows that income inequality has grown, not shrunk, under the current president.

“All told, income inequality has tended to get worse under President Obama,” American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks said.

According to a recent FOX News poll, Barack Obama polls miserably on doing his job on the issue of income inequality. 52% disapprove with how Obama has handled income inequality and only 39% approve. So with Obama failing at an issue he claims to care about, how does he even have the audacity to bring the issue up at the State of the Union Address? Obama’s economic policies have made things worse for those lower income earners, while he has made the Wall Street fat cats richer. Hmm, but I thought Obama hated the rich? Obama has falsely propped up the stock markets thanks to the fed’s quantitative easing which only made the top 5% and 1% more and more money. It is those folks who can afford to take risks in the markets. However, for the average people who Obama claims to care about and tries to talk a good game, according to the recent Fox poll, 74% still feel like the country is in a recession. But don’t worry America, Obama has the answer to fixing income inequality … raising the minimum wage. Good grief, really! With so many people unemployed or underemployed, with so many Americans on food stamps and with so many people having just given up and not even in the labor force, why wouldn’t the gap be larger? When a Democrat party sets out to create a government dependent class of people, why is it that much of a surprise that the gap widens? Recessions affect the middle and lower classes the most.

U.S. income inequality, on rise for decades, is now highest since 1928.

Using tax-return data from the IRS, Saez has built extensive income-distribution datasets going back 100 years. He defines “income” as pre-tax cash market income — wages and salaries; dividends, interest, rent and other returns on invested capital; business profits; and realized capital gains. He excludes Social Security payments, unemployment benefits and other government transfer payments, which are more substantial today than before the Great Depression.

In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution: By 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades.

But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise).

Let Them Eat Cake … Obama’s and Biden’s Spent $295,437 On Just One Vacation Weekend

Let Them Eat Cake, But they are for the middle class …

As most Americans struggle to find full time employment, wonder how they are going to afford healthcare coverage after losing their insurance they they liked thanks to Obamacare, worry about becoming part of  or being apart of the record number of Americans on food stamps or wonder why the federal debt is at $17.3 trillion and counting … The Obama’s and Biden’s manage to take some pricey weekend vacations on the tax payer’s dime. According to the Washington Examiner, via Judicial Watch, three separate jaunts taken by President Obama, first lady Michelle Obama, and Vice President Joe Biden during last year’s Presidents Day weekend cost at least $295,437.

Just more SACRIFICE  and skin in the game from King & Queen Obama, and their court jester, Biden.

Presidents Day seems to have no equal when when it comes to how the occupants of the White House and vice president’s residence vacation.

According to new records obtained by the taxpayer watchdog group Judicial Watch, three separate jaunts taken by President Obama, first lady Michelle Obama, and Vice President Joe Biden during last year’s Presidents Day weekend cost at least $295,437.

And that’s mostly just for security, not Air Force One or other official costs.

The records were obtained from the U.S. Secret Service and details some of the “security and/or other services” of Obama’s mid-February 2013 golf trip to West Palm Beach, Fla., the annual Aspen, Colo. ski trip taken by the first lady and her daughters, and the Biden family trip, also to Aspen.

According to Judicial Watch, the president’s trip cost the Secret Service $98,135.79, including $32,406.50 for the flights, $16,466.25 for rental cars, and $48,490 for hotel rooms.

The first lady’s trip totaled $81,523.64, including $13,221.30 in flights, $3,925 in rental cars, and $64,377.34 in lodging.

And the Biden ski weekend cost $115,777.61, including $5,315 in flights, $92,596 in accommodations, and $17,866.61 in rental cars.

However, the sad reality is that it might be cheaper and better for America if we just paid them to be on vacation for the rest of Obama’s second term in office.