1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI wouldn't say that there is NO verification that minimum wage increases decrease employment; I would say that the majority of studies that conclude it does recognize that any such effect is small and short-lived.
I'll check it out.
EDIT - Like most scientific papers, it's dense and wordy with jargon. I skimmed it and it seems that your summary is reasonable as far as I can tell. It's certainly a better source than my little diagram.
So it seems that the hypothesis that mimimum wages decrease employment has no verification as far as I can tell.
Originally posted by no1marauderThere can be absolutely no doubt that increasing the cost of labor results in a lesser demand for it. The 'study' recognises this and so they use the airy fairy subjective word 'significant' to cover their ass.
I wouldn't say that there is NO verification that minimum wage increases decrease employment; I would say that the majority of studies that conclude it does recognize that any such effect is small and short-lived.
Out in the middle of the ocean are two islands one with a higher minimum wage than the other. On one of these islands there has been until recently a thriving clothing industry. The example is right there, both islands are similarly remote. I say 'until recently' because the clothing factories are beginning to close, can you guess why?
Guam and Saipan
Originally posted by Wajoma'Significant' is not some airy fairy subjective term. It's pretty rigidly defined in statistics I believe.
There can be absolutely no doubt that increasing the cost of labor results in a lesser demand for it. The 'study' recognises this and so they use the airy fairy subjective word 'significant' to cover their ass.
Out in the middle of the ocean are two islands one with a higher minimum wage than the other. On one of these islands there has been until recen ...[text shortened]... cause the clothing factories are beginning to close, can you guess why?
Guam and Saipan
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThere are a million other factors that can effect those stats. The first thing that rings bells is the institutes subtitle "Research for Broadly Shared Prosperity
Table 7 is the most relevant part.
" not "...Broadly Earned Prosperity", so the agenda of the stats compilers is already questionable, they're looking for particular answers and you can bet if they couldn't be wafted in a certain direction they would not appear on that site.
Same as the Guam/Saipan example. At least there a comparison can be made, not a before and after comparison, but a side by side comparison.
There's only one question that needs answering:
An hour of your time - who does it belong to?
Originally posted by WajomaDo you believe the US should scrap the minimum wage?
There can be absolutely no doubt that increasing the cost of labor results in a lesser demand for it. The 'study' recognises this and so they use the airy fairy subjective word 'significant' to cover their ass.
Out in the middle of the ocean are two islands one with a higher minimum wage than the other. On one of these islands there has been until recen ...[text shortened]... cause the clothing factories are beginning to close, can you guess why?
Guam and Saipan
Just how - with the price of petrol and groceries (among other things) going up - do you suggest people on lower incomes get by?
1 edit
Originally posted by treetalkThe guvamint should regulate the price of gas down to 57 cents a gallon, then they should subsidise groceries and at night they should come to my house and tuck me into bed after reading me a bedtime story and turning my pluto night light on so I'm not scared of the dark.
Do you believe the US should scrap the minimum wage?
Just how - with the price of petrol and groceries (among other things) going up - do you suggest people on lower incomes get by?
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThat's not a scientific paper. It is a decently structured analysis, but it wouldn't be published in any journal.
I'll check it out.
EDIT - Like most scientific papers, it's dense and wordy with jargon. I skimmed it and it seems that your summary is reasonable as far as I can tell. It's certainly a better source than my little diagram.
So it seems that the hypothesis that mimimum wages decrease employment has no verification as far as I can tell.
Anyway, the evidence on the effects of minimum wages on employment is very mixed. There is a substantial number of papers for both negative and inexistent effects of minimum wage increases on unemployment. There is no consensus thus far.
There was a recent paper in Econometrica (one of the most prestigious journals in Economics) who highlighted that there is a recurring problem with such simple regressions, as they do not take into account the difference between supply side and demand side information.
That paper recommended an increase in the minimum wage, but the issue is still a very open topic among researchers.
Originally posted by treetalkWhy then doesn't the government mandate that everyone be paid a starting wage of $50 an hour, that would solve all their problems too.
Do you believe the US should scrap the minimum wage?
Just how - with the price of petrol and groceries (among other things) going up - do you suggest people on lower incomes get by?