Bold increases in the minimum wage

LafayetteBis · Apr 22, 2018

From the Economic Policy Institute -
Bold increases in the minimum wage should be evaluated for the benefits of raising low-wage workers’ total earnings

Excerpt:

Critics who cite claims of job loss are using a distorted frame

Workers today paid the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour are making 25 percent less than their counterparts made in 1968, despite the fact that the nation’s productivity has roughly doubled since then. Concern that low-wage workers are being deprived of the wage increases their increased productivity should deliver has led local, state, and federal policymakers to propose minimum wage increases that exceed the minimum wage increases that took effect in the 1990s and 2000s.

In this paper we show that the need to “go bold” calls for a more standard policy evaluation framework that assesses the costs and benefits for low-wage workers rather than a singular focus on potential employment losses:

The existing research on minimum wage policies justifies bolder increases than in the 1990s and 2000s. Federal and state governments enacted more modest minimum wage increases in the 1990s and 2000s, and these increases did not lead to substantial employment losses. This suggests that we could have pursued larger increases with few negative consequences for low-wage workers.

Critics who cite claims of job loss to reject bolder minimum wage increases are using a distorted evaluation framework that focuses only on the potential costs of raising the minimum wage and ignores the benefits of raising low-wage workers’ total earnings.

Focusing on job losses ignores the high degree of churn in the low-wage labor market, giving the misleading impression that a given pool of workers would lose their jobs and have no earnings over an entire year. The more likely scenario is that what is lost are job hours, and that these lost hours are spread among the affected workers, who work a little less but earn more per year.

Click to expand...

How many times - when raising wages is mentioned - the Replicants kneejerk with the same excuse. "That's gonna cost jobs!" When, in fact, What they either fail to understand or admit is that finite but deserved wage-increases are not a profit-burden but an effective means of enhancing Demand by putting more Disposable Income into the hands of Consumers ...

In their collective ignorance, what they fail to understand is that finite but deserved wage increases are not a profit-burden but an effective means of enhancing Demand by putting more Disposable Income into the hands of Consumers ...

Baff · Apr 22, 2018

Moronacy.

If I give you £100, it does not matter how much of that £100 you spend on my goods and services, I will still be down.

i give you £100
-100

you spend £100 on my services.

+100 -100 in services.

-100
+100
-100

Total -£100 for me. +£100 pounds for you.

How stupid do you take every one for?

Log in or Sign up

Bold increases in the minimum wage

LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

Baff Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

Bold increases in the minimum wage

LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

Baff Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches