Minimum wage--more data showing it's bad

[Loren Pechtel]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opini...-wage-drives-young-workers-from-labor-market/

Note that this link will rot soon.

They're looking at where minimum wage went up vs where it didn't. Oops--when the minimum wage goes up they lose more by working fewer hours than they gain from the higher wages.

 

[NMN]

but muh livin wage [/liberals]

 

[laughing dog]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opini...-wage-drives-young-workers-from-labor-market/

Note that this link will rot soon.

They're looking at where minimum wage went up vs where it didn't. Oops--when the minimum wage goes up they lose more by working fewer hours than they gain from the higher wages.

That is not what that link shows. An increase in the minimum wage from $8 to $9.65 is a 20% increase and

Following the minimum wage increases, limited service (fast food) restaurant employment fell by 4 percent in Minnesota relative to Wisconsin,” wrote Mr. Williams. “Further, youth employment fell by 9 percent in Minnesota following the minimum wage increases, while it increased by 10.6 percent in Wisconsin over the same time period.”

. Taken together that means those minimum wage workers who were still employed earned about 11% more in the aggregate.

And, from the same OP article,

Mr. Williams also found that Minneapolis-area restaurants increased prices by an average of 6 percent after the minimum wage hike, while prices had fallen by 2 percent in the four prior years. For individuals who found a job, there were benefits. Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin
.

So the OP conclusions are incorrect.

 

[DBT]

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

 

[untermensche]

Some human decides to not hire somebody because they don't want to pay that human a minimum wage.

In other words; As the scumbag nature of owners rises the more effect raising the minimum wage will have on employment.

If hiring decisions were taken out of the hands of scumbag dictators and put into the hands of democratic workers you would see a different economics.

 

[Ford]

Every time the minimum wage is raised, doom and gloom predictions follow.

And yet every time, those predictions fail to come true. Here in the US we're over a century in to enforcing minimum wages, and the economy doggedly refuses to collapse under the weight of paying workers a barely livable wage.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That is not what that link shows. An increase in the minimum wage from $8 to $9.65 is a 20% increase and
. Taken together that means those minimum wage workers who were still employed earned about 11% more in the aggregate.

And, from the same OP article,

Mr. Williams also found that Minneapolis-area restaurants increased prices by an average of 6 percent after the minimum wage hike, while prices had fallen by 2 percent in the four prior years. For individuals who found a job, there were benefits. Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin
.

So the OP conclusions are incorrect.

Pay went up for the employed---but note that it went up less than the price of what they sold went up.

Pay went way down for those who are no longer employed.

- - - Updated - - -

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

This only makes sense if you think $0/hr is better than $low/hour.

 

[DBT]

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

This only makes sense if you think $0/hr is better than $low/hour.

Not if employers actually need workers because the work has to be done and they are unable to do it themselves. Then they are willing to pay.

 

[Underseer]

but muh livin wage [/liberals]

The number of families who need government assistance to put food on the table grows every year.

If you are correct and paying a living wage will cause economic disaster (never mind that Loren's conclusions were wrong), then you are in effect arguing that capitalism has failed and the failure will continue to get worse. We would literally be better off with the bread lines of the Soviet Union.

- - - Updated - - -

Pay went up for the employed---but note that it went up less than the price of what they sold went up.

Pay went way down for those who are no longer employed.

- - - Updated - - -

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

This only makes sense if you think $0/hr is better than $low/hour.

Actually, isn't that what you're arguing?

If employers can pay $0, then they can hire an unlimited number of empmloyees, and the economy will go like gangbusters.

 

[bleubird]

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

This only makes sense if you think $0/hr is better than $low/hour.

Not if employers actually need workers because the work has to be done and they are unable to do it themselves. Then they are willing to pay.

There always seem to be this disconnect between capital and the need for labor.Symbiotic .

 

[DBT]

Not if employers actually need workers because the work has to be done and they are unable to do it themselves. Then they are willing to pay.

There always seem to be this disconnect between capital and the need for labor.Symbiotic .

Symbiotic, but often with a power balance weighed heavily in favour of capital, in the hands of those who have the means to start and run a business.

 

[ZiprHead]

That is not what that link shows. An increase in the minimum wage from $8 to $9.65 is a 20% increase and
. Taken together that means those minimum wage workers who were still employed earned about 11% more in the aggregate.

And, from the same OP article,

Mr. Williams also found that Minneapolis-area restaurants increased prices by an average of 6 percent after the minimum wage hike, while prices had fallen by 2 percent in the four prior years. For individuals who found a job, there were benefits. Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin
.

So the OP conclusions are incorrect.

Pay went up for the employed---but note that it went up less than the price of what they sold went up.

WUT? Since when is 20% less than 5.5%?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Poor Minnesota. An economy lagging behind Wisconsin.

 

[laughing dog]

Pay went up for the employed---but note that it went up less than the price of what they sold went up.

According to the article, the prices at Mn restaurants rose 6% which is significantly less than 20% increase in Mn wages. Even under the strong counter-intuitive assumption that Mn restaurant workers spend all (or most) of their wages on restaurant meals, 6% is less than 20%. I believe you compared 6% to the 5.5% number but that 5.5% refers to the pay increase over and above the pay increase to Wisconsin restaurant workers, not to the total wage increase to Mn workers.

So, your claim that “when the minimum wage goes up they lose more by working fewer hours than they gain from the higher wages. “ is rebutted by the data from your own cited OP article.

Referring to those who are unemployed is irrelevant to the claim above.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Minimum wage, set quite low as it is, is merely a safety net. A means of preventing even greater exploitation of vulnerable workers than we have now.

This only makes sense if you think $0/hr is better than $low/hour.

Not if employers actually need workers because the work has to be done and they are unable to do it themselves. Then they are willing to pay.

The data shows the result is unemployment for some of them.

- - - Updated - - -

Pay went up for the employed---but note that it went up less than the price of what they sold went up.

WUT? Since when is 20% less than 5.5%?

Prices went up 6%. Wages (of those who still had jobs) went up 5.5%. You're mixing up hourly wage with total wage.

 

[laughing dog]

Prices went up 6%. Wages (of those who still had jobs) went up 5.5%. You're mixing up hourly wage with total wage.

You are misreading your cited article. The words in the article are
Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin. That 5.5% does not refer to the Mn wage but the Mn pay relative to Wi pay.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Prices went up 6%. Wages (of those who still had jobs) went up 5.5%. You're mixing up hourly wage with total wage.

You are misreading your cited article. The words in the article are
Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin. That 5.5% does not refer to the Mn wage but the Mn pay relative to Wi pay.

As you say, 5.5% increase in total pay. You're missing that it's less than the 6% the goods they sold went up--try to implement this everywhere and the poor are worse off than before you did it.

 

[ZiprHead]

Prices went up 6%. Wages (of those who still had jobs) went up 5.5%. You're mixing up hourly wage with total wage.

You are misreading your cited article. The words in the article are
Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin. That 5.5% does not refer to the Mn wage but the Mn pay relative to Wi pay.

As you say, 5.5% increase in total pay. You're missing that it's less than the 6% the goods they sold went up--try to implement this everywhere and the poor are worse off than before you did it.

The article cited said the wages went up twenty percent. I even bolded it for you.

 

[laughing dog]

Prices went up 6%. Wages (of those who still had jobs) went up 5.5%. You're mixing up hourly wage with total wage.

You are misreading your cited article. The words in the article are
Average annual pay in Minnesota fast food restaurants increased 5.5 percent more than in Wisconsin. That 5.5% does not refer to the Mn wage but the Mn pay relative to Wi pay.

As you say, 5.5% increase in total pay. You're missing that it's less than the 6%

5.5% is increase in total pay MORE than in Wisconsin - it is not a 5.5% increase in total pay.

than the goods they sold went up

Total pay for those workers went up by more than 5.5%: wages went up 20% and employment fell by 9%, so total pay went up by around 11%.

--try to implement this everywhere and the poor are worse off than before you did it.

First, the working poor as a group are better off by at least 5% (11% - 6%). Second, the price increase is for restaurant meals, so only under the dubious assumption that restaurant workers use their wages to mostly consume restaurant meals does your analysis make any sense with your misuse of the 5.5% increase!

To summarize - a logical reading of your own article indicates that your claim that "when the minimum wage goes up they lose more by working fewer hours than they gain from the higher wages." is clearly false.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

As you say, 5.5% increase in total pay. You're missing that it's less than the 6% the goods they sold went up--try to implement this everywhere and the poor are worse off than before you did it.

The article cited said the wages went up twenty percent. I even bolded it for you.

Hourly wages went up 20%--but they lost most of it in having fewer hours.