Halloween Shocker

Laxalt Or, perhaps not.  The Laxalt Family pulls the plug on support for Adam Laxalt’s candidacy for Attorney General.  [Las Vegas Sun]

It has to hurt when it comes from the family?

“It is our belief that Ross Miller’s documented history of pulling himself up by his own bootstraps and establishing a well-respected career in law and public service while still maintaining a strong sense of family and community constitute the critical characteristics needed for Nevada’s highest legal office.”

Once again we’re treated to the spectacle of the Nevada Republican Party unable to keep the members of the Old Guard aligned with the Tea Party influx of fringe characters from the radical right.   There are Nevada Republicans who aren’t pleased with the antics of the Bundy Family, and who aren’t in ideological lock step with the pseudo-libertarian radicals.  There are Nevada Republicans for whom vote suppression is not a recipe for winning hearts, minds, and votes.  However, it will be a struggle for them to take their party back from the reactionaries and radicals who have provided candidates in some of the last elections.  They are afraid of some of their own, meaning independents and Democrats should be equally alarmed.

Happy Halloween?

Comments Off

Filed under Politics

The Halloween Campaign Season

Halloween House It’s always great fun when Halloween and Mid Term Elections converge.   Or, as comedian Jon Stewart puts it, “We’ve got nothing to fear, but fear itself, so we’re going with fear.”   If I were really getting into the spirit of the campaign/Halloween season I’d put the Halloween candy up on the roof, take down the ladder and lock it up in the shed, and then tell the kiddies that if they are patient, hard working, diligent, and patriotic some day the candy will trickle down to their eager little mitts.

However, since I’m definitely not a Republican, the candy will stay on the porch where everyone gets a shot at it.   So, what’s scary this season?

Halloween Pumpkin

It’s three pumpkin scary that there are still a large number of voters who are clinging to the failed and long debunked hoax that what is good for Wall Street is necessarily good for Main Street.   Wall Street, and the financialists therein,  love the witches brew of mergers and acquisitions – whether the companies involved are actually improved or gutted – and tales of layoffs, off-shoring, and other devices to reduce costs and improve “shareholder value.”  Anything which reduces the expenses is received with joy, such as not paying their share of taxes by using accounting tricks and the ever popular Inversions.  

So, when faced with the probability that they might have to contribute their fair share or face their responsibilities, the corporate shills resort to dragging out their well rehearsed talking points – taxes cost jobs, the wealthy create jobs, taxes make us less ‘competitive,’ and regulations are a burden.  These lines are just so much mush in the core of an over-ripe pumpkin.

The good folks on Main Street and Elm Street are left holding the bag, every time a multi-national corporation plays games with the tax system Main Street and Elm Street have to foot the bills for roads, infrastructure, education, national defense, and health services.  

Halloween Pumpkin

Another three scary pumpkins for a political system so cynical that cheating is required to win.  There’s NO epidemic of voter impersonation fraud in this country.  An analysis of 2,068 cases of fraud in the entire nation since 2000 revealed that there were only 10 cases of voter impersonation fraud. There are approximately 146,000,000 registered voters in this country.  Do the arithmetic.  Your calculation should result in an answer of 6.84e-8.  (If that “e-8” is throwing you, just remember to move the decimal point place 8 places to the left.)

However, that infinitesimally small number hasn’t stopped candidates from advocating Photo ID laws, the purpose of which  is to reduce the number of the elderly, the young, the ethnic minorities, and the women at the polling stations.   We even have our very own Vote Suppressionist running to be the chief election officer (Secretary of State) in Nevada.  Voting suppression bills are enacted because voters buy into the fear-mongering about fraud, and the utterly illogical personalization talking point, “Would you want your vote to be canceled out by a fraud?”   The answer, of course, is “no,” but the odds against this actually happening are literally astronomical.

Halloween Pumpkin

It’s also three pumpkins scary we have media outlets which cater to the least attractive  human characteristics – like, fear and what it does to otherwise rational beings.   Yes, what the Islamic State proposes to do in Iraq and Syria is serious stuff, but remember the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack are 1:20,000,000.   The terrorists would no doubt like to get us sufficiently agitated so that we’d agree to send troops to their region, which would make it ever so much easier to kill Americans. 

And yes, the Ebola virus is a nasty little bug. However, it tends to thrive in places where medical facilities are both rare and not well regulated.  It seems to prefer places with inadequate sanitation infrastructure.  Thus far that does not describe the public health systems in North America and western Europe.  What should concern us more than the incidents are questions about how our privatized health care delivery services are to regulated in order to prevent outbreaks of any infectious disease.

There is an old bit of business advice which says, “You can’t control what you don’t own.”  We can apply the adage to public health care facilities.  Government standards can be enforced in public facilities, whereas under the current system of corporate health care standards come in the form of guidelines – the implementation of which may not be as uniform as we’d like. One relatively recent report says that public hospitals declined by 27% in major suburban areas from 1996 to 2002, and by 16% in major cities.  [AmMedNews]  Are standards of accreditation strong enough to maintain a level of health care practices in which the environment is safe for both the patients and the medical staff?  This question leads to our next set of pumpkins.

Halloween Pumpkin There ought to be three scary pumpkins awarded to the advocates of de-regulation.  The exploiters, polluters, and “shareholder value” advocates have been beating drums about “burdensome regulations” since the corporate interests organized their campaigns to repeal any law which impinged on their profits.  For example, since January 2011 the House of Representatives have voted 297 times to weaken public health and environmental protections. [CWA]  

Though the Enron Debacle seems a distant memory from 2002, the Republicans are still trying to repeal the Sarbanes-Oxley Act which sought to curb the abuses that allowed the scam to spread through the financial sector.  Opponents of financial regulation are still calling for the Act’s amendment or outright repeal in spite of the benefits stemming from its enforcement.   The Dodd Frank Act, enacted in the wake of yet more financial sector abuse, and the cavorting in the Wall Street Casino leading to the Housing Bubble disaster,  passed its 4th anniversary with more calls from the GOP to repeal it.

It would be remiss not to mention the REINS Act again.  This bit of legislation from the House is a de-regulator’s wet dream, and everyone else’s nightmare.  Congress would have to approve any and every regulation set forth by any agency of the federal government – environmental, financial, and (compliments of the Smith Amendment) public health. [See H.R. 367] Representative Jason T. Smith (R-MO8) offered amendment #450 which included all regulations under the Affordable Care Act.  This is as good a time as any to see what Representative Smith’s amendment would do in terms of hospital regulations.

Section 3025 of the ACA outlined a “readmission reduction program” which penalizes hospitals which have readmission rates higher than acceptable.  The idea was to get hospitals to use Best Practices (pdf) to reduce the readmission rate for cardiac patients, those who were at risk of being readmitted because of a lack of resources, and those who might show signs of infections after initial hospitalization.   Now, imagine the members of the House of Representatives “de-regulating” hospitals which have high readmission rates by refusing to approve the CMS standards.   That’s more money in the coffers of the 81% of Alabama hospitals which have been penalized; 82% of the hospitals in Arkansas which have been penalized; 89% of the hospitals in Illinois which have been penalized; and the 153 hospitals in Texas (out of 322) which have been penalized. [Kaiser]

Want to get scared again?  There’s credible research suggesting that hospital acquired infections affect the readmission rate [AmMedNews] and hence the regulations from Section 3025 relate to hospital sanitation practices and the prevention of hospital acquired infections.  Now, grab the remote and try to find a cable news channel that isn’t overloading the airwaves about Ebola. Quiver again, while thinking that Representative Smith’s little amendment could remove the incentive for corporately owned hospitals to literally clean up their acts.

Halloween Pumpkin

Instead of being fearful, let’s enjoy the Halloween season with thoughts of increasing the minimum wage and adding about $22 billion to our gross domestic product. [TP]  Or, we could think about further reducing our dependence on foreign oil by encouraging more solar power research, and ending the $4 billion annual subsidy paid by taxpayers to highly profitable Giant Oil Companies.  Or, we could think of reducing the burden on college students by allowing them to renegotiate or refinance student loans.  We could start by insuring students aren’t required to repay more than 10% of their annual income. [WH] We could improve the Voting Right Act and insure that everyone, in every state has an equal opportunity to cast his or her ballot.  We could enact legislation to require equal pay for equal work, improving family financial situations across the country.  We could employ people in our construction sector by starting to work on our infrastructure issues – our airports, dams, bridges, water lines, wastewater facilities, and  levees could all use some work.  [ASCE]  We could enact reasonable gun safety legislation.  And we could enact legislation to insure there’s no discrimination of any kind in American commerce.

The scary part is that none of these things will get started, much less accomplished, with Republicans sowing fear and discomfort – belaboring spooky apparitions like “Benghazzziiiii,” or “IRSssssss,” or “ISISssssss,” or other specters, wraiths, and spirits.   It’s Halloween after all, and  those are manufactured phantoms, nor more material than the costumes available at any big box store.   Instead of focusing on the Spooks of October, we ought to be enthusiastic about the opportunities in November, such as electing people to state and national offices who aren’t afraid of their own shadows.

1 Comment

Filed under Economy, financial regulation, Health Care, Iraq, terrorism, Vote Suppression, Voting

The Realtors Are Coming: Nevada’s Question Three

The Realtors Against Question 3, related to the Alliance for Property Protection Rights, related to the National Association of Realtors, related to Nevada Data Mine LLC, would like for me to vote “no” on Nevada’s ballot Question 3.  Oh hark! The fear mongering begins. Today’s mail includes my second mailer from their offices at 760 Margrave Drive, Reno, and it tells me:

Thousands of Nevadans would lose their jobs. Employers would have to pay the tax on total revenue, even if they have no profits and are losing money.”  Really?

Here’s the real Question 3: Shall the Nevada Revised Statutes be amended to create a 2% tax to be imposed on a margin of the gross revenue of entities doing business in Nevada whose total revenue for any taxable year exceeds $1 million, with the proceeds of the tax going to the State Distributive School Account to be apportioned among Nevada’s school districts and charter schools?

So, some firm doing more than $1 million worth of business in this state might be “profit-less, or losing money?”  That isn’t a tax problem – it’s a lousy management issue.  If the firm’s total revenue exceeds $1 million, and the taxable margin is determined by taking the lesser of (a) 70% of the entity’s total revenue; or (b) the entity’s total revenue minus the cost of goods sold or the amount of compensation paid to its owners and employees – then if a 2% margin tax would put the outfit out of business I think we could reasonably expect the enterprise is already doomed.  But wait, the second item is pure doom and gloom:

It would devastate future job growth in the state. This would be one of the largest tax increases in Nevada’s history, making us less competitive with neighboring states like California.”  Devastate?

This is nothing more than the superannuated argument that lower taxes mean more economic growth.   So, let’s look at our neighboring state.  California was looking at a $60 billion budget deficit when the Housing Bubble/Wall Street Fiasco exploded, by using a combination of budget cuts and tax increases it had a budget surplus as of 2013. [USAT] In 2012 California’s GDP growth was 3.5%.  As of 2013 it improved by another 2%. [BEA] Nevada’s rate YOY 2012-2013? 1.0%.  Thus much for the anti-tax argument.  And, while we’re at it – just once could some organization NOT employ the hyperbolic “Biggest Most Gigantic Extra Colossal Humongous Tax Increase Ever” ploy? That’s getting even more hirsute than the anti-tax argument.

The Legislature would be able to divert funds to anything, not just education. It’s a blank check for politicians with no oversight or accountability.”  Obviously,  we DO need to put more money into our educational programs because these people can’t read.

What part of “with the proceeds of the tax going to the State Distributive School Account to be apportioned among Nevada’s school districts and charter schools” isn’t comprehensible?  Granted the vocabulary is about at the 12th grade level, but this shouldn’t be an obstacle to people used to reading real estate contracts?   But, there’s more:

Increased costs would be passed on to your family. All of us would soon pay more for healthcare, food, clothing, gas, water, and housing.” Oh please!

All business expenses are passed along the economic food chain. They always have been.  Imagine becoming worked up into a lather because the price of cocoa has increased to a three year high?  Merciful Heavens, it’s up to $3,185 a ton.  [WSJ]  This cost will surely be passed along to candy bar consumers! Oh, the horror.  However, how much more might we be paying if employees had to find private education, or private security, or private fire protection services, or pay for toll roads… Get the picture?  At it’s core, the APPR argument says that any and all pass-along expenses are bad for us, without, of course, offering any substantiation for the assumption.  It’s more logical to argue that the economic benefits of better public educational services are at least commensurate with any pass-along expenses we might incur as consumers.   We do know from both statistical and experiential information that better schools = higher property values for homeowners; [DukeEdu]  just as better police and fire protection contribute to the value of residential property.

And, this leads us to wonder – why are real estate interests so dead set against a business margin tax increase?

Comments Off

Filed under Nevada economy, Nevada politics, nevada taxation

Republicans are a Public Health Hazard

 

Health Hazard

Just Saying… Nevada early voting begins on October 18, 2014. Register, and vote.

Comments Off

Filed under health, Health Care

A Virus Could Ask Better Questions?

TV Set 1 I get the part wherein cable news needs ratings to sell advertising, although exactly how much revenue can be accumulated from purveyors of unregulated supplements, interesting but not likely remunerative litigation, and vehicle insurance is beyond me.  So, the coverage of the ebola outbreak in western Africa isn’t surprising – it’s the Lost Airplane of the Day.  What is alarming is the lack of substance, and I’m thinking of the CNN broadcast in which a novelist is foisted off on the public as an expert on viral transmission.   Amid all the hysteria, we’re missing some important points.

What is the state of our medical research? What happened to our “stable research support trajectory? Instead of being entertained by the musings of a science fiction novelist, perhaps we could be hearing more from medical experts?  Say, from the National Institutes of Health?

“Dr. Francis Collins, the head of the National Institutes of Health, said that a decade of stagnant spending has “slowed down” research on all items, including vaccinations for infectious diseases. As a result, he said, the international community has been left playing catch-up on a potentially avoidable humanitarian catastrophe.

“NIH has been working on Ebola vaccines since 2001. It’s not like we suddenly woke up and thought, ‘Oh my gosh, we should have something ready here,'” Collins told The Huffington Post on Friday. “Frankly, if we had not gone through our 10-year slide in research support, we probably would have had a vaccine in time for this that would’ve gone through clinical trials and would have been ready.”  [HuffPo]

Why is the National Institutes of Health purchasing power down 23% from ten years ago? Or,  why does the following situation hold in terms of funding for research into infectious diseases?

“In fiscal year 2004, the agency’s budget was $28.03 billion. In FY 2013, it was $29.31 billion — barely a change, even before adjusting for inflation. The situation is even more pronounced at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a subdivision of NIH, where the budget has fallen from $4.30 billion in FY 2004 to $4.25 billion in FY 2013.” [HuffPo]

We’ve endured a “ten year slide in research support,” meaning that we’ve not invested enough since 2004 to keep on track to provide pharmaceuticals and other research related to diseases such as that caused by the Ebola virus. Could it be that in the last ten years there has been a steady drum beat of opposition to federal funding … for almost anything? 

Our very own Representative Mark Amodei (R-NV2) announced back in January 2013 that federal spending was out of control, and Congress “hasn’t had the courage to fix it.”  In December 2013 he was pleased as punch with the Budget Act which cut federal funding, saying:

“This two year agreement moves us away from government by crisis and continuing resolutions, where so much of the status quo persists, and back to a legislative framework for reforming federal spending. It cuts the budget deficit by $23 billion without raising taxes at a time when the Senate wanted to increase spending by $1 trillion. It is 100 percent in line with the Budget Control Act deficit reduction numbers and does not end the sequester cuts, but replaces upfront, across-the-board cuts with targeted savings that are both larger and produce additional deficit reduction over the long term. The agreement is also $83 billion below the original Ryan Budget (2010) target for FY 2014.”

His current official website tells us:

“As a fiscal conservative, I believe that our nation’s deficit is out of control. We now borrow 42 cents for every dollar we spend. The bloated federal government spends some of that money on frivolous projects that benefit only a select group of special interests and other needless expenses.”

Now, in light of that ten year slide in appropriations for the National Institutes of Health, and the loss of the “stable research support trajectory,” can Representative Amodei still justify the reduction in NIH funding?  It isn’t like the NIH didn’t advertise what was going to happen under the terms of the budget act Representative Amodei was applauding:

“On March 1, 2013, as required by statute, President Obama signed an order initiating sequestration. The sequestration requires NIH to cut 5 percent or $1.55 billion of its fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget. NIH must apply the cut evenly across all programs, projects, and activities (PPAs), which are primarily NIH institutes and centers. This means every area of medical research will be affected.” [NIH]  (emphasis added)

Yes, “every area of medical research will be affected,” and that included the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a subdivision of the National Institutes of Health.   Remember that Government Shutdown in October 2013?  Not only did clinical trials get shut down at the CDC, but so did the processing of laboratory samples. [MedNewsToday]   All this makes a sentient person wonder how much more “reforming the budget” we can stand?

What is the status of our prevention and control capacity?  There’s a penchant on the right to try to attach the “sequester” to the President as if the budget he signed hadn’t been enacted by the Congress in 2013.  For those functioning in the real world,  it’s no secret that the Congress slashed funding for the CDC emergency preparedness program. [Vox]  Again, the CDC announced well in advance what the sequester cuts would do.

About $195 million was cut from “emerging and zoonotic infectious diseases,” another $19 million was cut from “public health scientific services,” also cut was $18 million from “global health” categories, and another $98 million from “public health preparedness and response” programs.  [CDC pdf]

$160 million less would be available in funding to on the ground public health in the United States, “a system already strained by state and local budget cuts.”  A further $33 million was cut from “state and local preparedness ability to respond to natural and man-made disasters.” [CDC pdf]

Do we have an institutional structure in place to enforce CDC guidelines on public health matters?   The CDC has issued guidelines for EMT responders in the wake of Ebola illness, now we have to ask, how are the guidelines to be implemented?  How are CDC guidelines to be implemented in hospital settings?   What the CDC issues are recommendations – what the privately owned hospitals actually DO is up to the administration and leadership in those hospitals.  And, now we get to the part where the people at ground zero are involved. 

The California Nurses Association surveyed its members and found that some were working in hospitals lacking “necessary protective equipment, such as HAZMAT suits, face shields, and fluid resistant suits and gowns.” Some also reported inadequate training on how to deal with Ebola, for example being given a video to watch without any hands-on, personal, training or rehearsals.  [CNA]

Obviously, those attending to patients with Ebola or SARS would need to use “Full Barrier” personal protective equipment, so the next obvious question should be – Does each local hospital, especially those in metropolitan areas served by international transportation hubs, have the Full Barrier PPEs, and have those who need them been trained in their use? And this state of affairs leads to yet another question.

What level of de-regulation in health care can we tolerate in order to provide the best public health services?    The NIH can research, and the CDC may recommend to their collective hearts content – but if the House of Representatives had its way every regulation would be scrutinized by Congress to see if it impinged in any way on the profitability of the health care provider.

When the House passed the REINS Act in 2013 language was added to require Congressional approval on health care related rules, in an amendment sponsored by Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO). [Hill]  Representative Amodei (R-NV2) and Heck (R-NV3) both voted in favor of the REINS Act, including as it did, the provision requiring Congressional approval of health care related regulations.  [vote 445]  Representative Titus (D-NV1) had the common sense to vote nay.  Worse still, for those who believe that hospitals should be required to act with some uniformity during a public health crisis, both Representatives Amodei and Heck voted in favor of the Smith Amendment. [vote 438]  Again, Representative Titus had the foresight to vote nay.

Not to put too fine a point to it, but Representatives Heck and Amodei voted in favor of a provision which would prevent the implementation of standards for isolation care and personal protective equipment/training if the hospitals could show that such regulations diminished their profitability.  Not only did Representative Amodei vote in favor of the Smith Amendment, and vote in favor of the REINS Act, he was one of the 164 co-sponsors.  The bill was sent to the Senate wherein it was, thankfully, buried in the files of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

In the instance of H.R. 367 (113th) nothing could be a better example of putting profits before people, especially considering the attachment of the Smith Amendment.

Our media would serve us far better if we were to be given background information on how our government and health care institutions could better protect us from – Ebola, MERS, SARS, Norovirus, drug resistant strains of bacteria, etc. and how funding priorities relate to national, state, and local preparedness.   It would beat listening to a novelist, a pundit, or some lady with a Ouija Board.

Comments Off

Filed under Amodei, Congress, conservatism, health, Health Care, worker safety

A Message from Your GOP

“Hold Your Breath!” and don’t think…

Be Afraid

Comments Off

Filed under Politics

Thinking Minimum and Waiting For Yes

The minimum wage in Nevada is $7.25 per hour if the employer sponsors group health insurance policies, or $8.25 if health insurance is not part of the compensation package.  This doesn’t mean a person will automatically receive those wages because some employers are taking advantage of loopholes in current statutes [LVRJ] There are other elements which are the subject of FAQs on the Labor Commissioner’s web site. 

However, the bottom line is still that the minimum wage in Nevada is not a living wage.  The point is driven home in the realm of fast food operations, and there is talk of a bill in the upcoming session of the state legislature to raise the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour.   Because minimum wage levels are a topic inserted in the state constitution, the raise would have to pass in two sessions and go to the voters. [LVRJ]  The second important point is that Nevada job growth is showing in sectors which employ a high number of minimum wage workers – in the sector we are pleased to call “leisure and hospitality.”

Nevada Job Growth 2014

The median wage for a fast food cook in Nevada is $18,890 per year.  [DETR]  A counter attendant can expect median annual wages of $20,990. [DETR]   Now, look at the 2014 Federal poverty guidelines:

Federal Poverty lines 2014

Obviously, there’s ample evidence from the charts above to support the contention that if employers pay sub-living level wages, then the state and local governments must make up the difference in the form of social safety net programs. In short, the taxpayers are subsidizing the businesses. 

But, but, but…  Spare me the noble story of How I Started Mowing Lawns in the 7th Grade And Worked Up To….  Only about 7% of the low wage work force in this country is composed of teenagers.  This means 93% of low wage workers are adults.  Women make up about 60% of the low wage work force, and a growing number of low wage workers are men. [LWW]

But, but, butgranted that wages are low in retail and fast food sectors but this is insufficient to raise the minimum for everyone… yes, fast food work considered nationally makes up about 5% of low wage employment.  However, we’re forgetting about data entry operators, bank tellers, child care workers, teachers’ aides, home health care providers, maids, cooks, porters, cashiers, pharmacy assistants, parking lot attendants, ambulance drivers, dry-cleaning workers, hotel receptionists, and a plethora of other low wage occupations.   The median annual wage for a home health care provider is $26,170; for a bank teller $24,940; for a grocery cashier about $21,370.  None of these jobs would get a person with a family of four above the federal poverty line.

But, but, butif we raise the minimum wage that will actually destroy jobs… this bit of mythology has been around since time out of mind.  It’s purely theoretical, rising from the minds of well paid lobbyists from the United State Chamber of Commerce, and at least five academic studies have debunked it:

“A significant body of academic research has found that raising the minimum wage does not result in job losses even during hard economic times. There are at least five different academic studies focusing on increases to the minimum wage—including increases ranging from 7 percent to 12.3 percent made during periods of high unemployment—that find an increase in the minimum wage has no significant effect on employment levels. The results are likely because the boost in demand and reduction in turnover provided by a minimum wage counteracts the higher wage costs.

Similarly, a simple analysis of increases to the minimum wage on the state level, even during periods of state unemployment rates above 8 percent, shows that the minimum wage does not kill jobs. Indeed the states in our simple analysis had job growth slightly above the national average. [...]

All the studies came to the same conclusion—that raising the minimum wage had no effect on employment.” [emphasis in original] [TProg]

But, but, butthink of the Mom and Pop store… which we would except for the fact that 2/3rds of low wage workers don’t work at the corner bodega. 2/3rds of our low wage workers labor for large corporations.  For example, WalMart has seen profits grow by 23% since the Recession, Yum! Brands by 45%, and McDonalds by a hefty 130%, with help from U.S. taxpayers supporting their personnel.  [TP]  From the April 15th edition of Forbes we learn that WalMart workers cost U.S. taxpayers approximately $6.2 billion in public assistance.  One certainly wouldn’t want to disparage the efforts of the Walton’s to create a successful business – but on the other hand there’s no reason to give the ultra-rich family gifts from the taxpayers.  McDonald’s cost the U.S. taxpayers some $1.2 billion in public assistance. [HuffPo]  A billion here, a billion there, and soon, as the late Senator Everett Dirksen opined, it starts to add up to real money.  That would be real money Mom and Pop are paying in taxation to support their competition.

And then there’s the concept – repeated to the point of redundancy – that increasing wages increases aggregate demand, and increased demand produces increased sales, and increased sales yield increased profits – for any business, large or small.

We should be asking Nevada politicians who are out seeking our votes this season: Do you support raising the minimum wage in Nevada to $15.00 per hour?  If what comes back is a “No” qualified by the standard talking points – it’s just kids, or it’s just a few jobs, or it’ll kill employment – then the politician in question is simply regurgitating the corporate line, the big corporate line.  The big corporate lie.

We’re waiting for Yes.

Comments Off

Filed under Economy, Nevada economy, Nevada politics