"According to Federal Reserve data, about 484,000 people work in the San Francisco County. If 944 jobs vanished, that would amount to 0.19 percent of the city workforce. That's a tiny, tiny number, so small that no economist can really predict it with any accuracy. The city gains and loses that many jobs every week, just through normal business activities."
"How about the Gross Domestic Product? The report says the tax could lower the city's GDP by $206 million, which sounds like a big number. Except that the city's total GDP is around $268 billion (again, Federal Reserve data). So the loss would amount to (get ready) 0.07 percent. Again: This type of change happens all the time, for better and for worse."
"The bottom line: The impact of Prop. D on jobs and the local economy is far too miniscule to even measure. The impact on essential public services is massive."
"It's also wrong. The report (and the headlines) wildly overplay the relatively tiny impact Prop. D could have on the private sector as it saves hundreds of public-sector jobs-and services. It's just super shoddy journalism across the board."
A study claims Prop. D, an overpaid executive tax, would harm the local economy. The reported job loss is 944 jobs, compared with about 484,000 workers in San Francisco County, which equals 0.19% of the workforce. The reported GDP reduction is $206 million, compared with total GDP of about $268 billion, which equals 0.07%. These changes are described as tiny and within normal week-to-week fluctuations in job counts and economic performance. The argument concludes that the private-sector impact is too minuscule to measure accurately, while the public-sector impact on essential services is described as massive.
Read at 48 hills
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]