Minimum wage - it helps poor people

[Phokus]

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/along-the-minimum-wage-battle-front/

The most famous economics paper showing positive effects of a minimum wage hike was from Card and Krueger - 2 economists from princeton.

In 1994, however, a now-famous case study by the economists David Card and Alan Krueger compared employment trends in fast-food establishments in New Jersey affected by an increase in the state minimum wage in 1992 with trends in nearby counties of Pennsylvania, where no legislative change had taken place.

Interestingly, the attitudes about minimum wage amongst economists have drastically shifted:

Those opposed to government intervention once dominated this battlefield. In 1990, for instance, a survey of members of the American Economic Association showed that 60 percent agreed that minimum wages increase unemployment among young and unskilled workers.

Rallying under this banner, many economists pushed back against the conventional wisdom with some success. By 2000, only 46 percent of members of the American Economic Association agreed that minimum wages increase unemployment among young and unskilled workers. Another study published in 2006 showed that slightly less than half of all economists surveyed thought the minimum wage should be eliminated, while more than a third favored increasing it.

Now there's a new study that backs up Card/Kreuger's original study:

An important new study exploiting this opportunity will appear this month in The Review of Economics and Statistics. The economists Arindrajit Dube of the University of Massachusetts Amherst, T. William Lester of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and Michael Reich of the University of California, Berkeley, closely analyze employment trends for several categories of low-wage workers over a 16-year period in all counties sharing a common border with a county in another state where minimum wage increases followed a different trajectory.

They report that increases in minimum wages had no negative effects on low-wage employment and successfully increased the income of workers in food services and retail employment, as well as the narrower category of workers in restaurants.

The study successfully addresses a number of criticisms previously leveled at the case-study approach and points to flaws in all previous studies that have found negative employment effects.

Study is located here: https://udrive.oit.umass.edu/folbre/REST_a_00039-Dube_proof2.pdf

edit:

Also important:

Arindrajit Dube clearly explains the issues in a 12-minute interview. He emphasizes that higher minimum wages tend to reduce worker turnover, benefiting both workers and employers.

Interview here: http://www.therealnews.com/t2/index...=74&jumival=5650&updaterx=2010-10-08+11:40:17

 

[Infohawk]

Did you really have to start another thread on the minimum wage?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage#Surveys_of_economists
Sorry but it sounds like most economists are not enamored with minimum wage laws.

 

[Amused]

Wow. Lock.

 

[Phokus]

Woah shit, more stuff that proves me wrong, lock.

Fixed

 

[nick1985]

Lets make minimum wage $500,000 an hour. Everyone deserves to be a millionaire.

 

[Phokus]

Did you really have to start another thread on the minimum wage?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage#Surveys_of_economists
Sorry but it sounds like most economists are not enamored with minimum wage laws.

It rapidly changed, thanks to better methodologies in observing and studying it.

By 2000, only 46 percent of members of the American Economic Association agreed that minimum wages increase unemployment among young and unskilled workers. Another study published in 2006 showed that slightly less than half of all economists surveyed thought the minimum wage should be eliminated, while more than a third favored increasing it.

 

[Amused]

Fixed

Deluded much? You aren't even replying to my thread... it was someone else's thread, dumbass.

 

[woodie1]

Lets make minimum wage $500,000 an hour. Everyone deserves to be a millionaire.

Agreed! Get the Tea Party on board and away we go!

 

[Phokus]

Lets make minimum wage $500,000 an hour. Everyone deserves to be a millionaire.

I know i should be quoting someone from ATPN but:

Liberal: "Why don't we heat the oven by a few degrees more, the bread will cook better/faster"
Conservative: "THE HEAT IS FINE AS IT IS, WHY DON'T WE UP THE HEAT TO 500 DEGREES WITH YOUR 'LOGIC' YOU LIBERAL COMMIE BASTARD?!?!"

 

[Phokus]

Deluded much? You aren't even replying to my thread... it was someone else's thread, dumbass.

What thread? And i absolutely LOVE that you ran away from my Australia thread, you wuss.

 

[Amused]

What thread? And i absolutely LOVE that you ran away from my Australia thread, you wuss.

The sad thing about you is that you act like you are winning something here.

 

[Infohawk]

It rapidly changed, thanks to better methodologies in observing and studying it.

Sorry, according to your own quote it sounds like a plurality are still against it. Let's face it, you're a partisan cherry-picking articles to support your position. Not very impressive.

 

[Phokus]

The sad thing about you is that you act like you are winning something here.

Wow, wait a minute. You mean that each household got money BACK from the government and spent it? Kinda like a tax rebate??? Or a tax break??? You mean, in a time of crisis, the Australian government CUT TAXES???

You mean the stimulus was really a tax break for individuals???

It wasn't massive spending on "green projects" and unneeded road works and expanding government agencies?

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it a rather Republican ideology to give tax payers a break, and give then rebates on their taxes???

I think this is kinda backfiring on you a bit. Even if you had a disagreement with ProfJohn a year ago, this does NOT bode well for your party's policies.

^---- Literally has nothing to do with the Australian stimulus packages. You're a moron.

 

[Phokus]

Sorry, according to your own quote it sounds like a plurality are still against it. Let's face it, you're a partisan cherry-picking articles to support your position. Not very impressive.

A similar survey in 2006 by Robert Whaples polled PhD members of the American Economic Association. Whaples found that 37.7% of respondents supported an increase in the minimum wage, 14.3% wanted it kept at the current level, 1.3% wanted it decreased, and 46.8% wanted it completely eliminated.[72]

A plurality are not 'against' minimum wage. I'm sorry that you're unable to read and add

37.7 + 14.3 = 52 (increase minimum wage crowd + keep it at the current level)

46.8 + 1.3 = 48.1 (decrease minimum wage + eliminate it)

 

[Throckmorton]

Wow, someone posts about a study proving that minimum wage doesn't harm employment and has big benefits like more earnings and lower turnover, and you nutjobs flame instead of actually trying to participate in a discussion. Why am I not surprised?

 

[Phokus]

Wow, someone posts about a study proving that minimum wage doesn't harm employment and has big benefits like more earnings and lower turnover, and you nutjobs flame instead of actually trying to participate in a discussion. Why am I not surprised?

Facts and logic are kryptonite to conservatives, of course they'd be hostile to studies that contradict their worldview.

These idiots still believe Reagan's trickle down economics worked

*totally ignores 30 years of stagnant/declining wages for the average american*

 

[Amused]

Wow, someone posts about a study proving that minimum wage doesn't harm employment and has big benefits like more earnings and lower turnover, and you nutjobs flame instead of actually trying to participate in a discussion. Why am I not surprised?

This thread should be locked since it is a direct response to another existing and current thread with the exact same topic.

 

[Phokus]

This thread should be locked since it is a direct response to another existing and current thread with the exact same topic.

My thread's superior, since it has, you know, actual studies and facts and not some bullshit opinion. Oh wait, that's standard republicans.txt trope.

 

[Infohawk]

Wow, someone posts about a study proving that minimum wage doesn't harm employment and has big benefits like more earnings and lower turnover, and you nutjobs flame instead of actually trying to participate in a discussion. Why am I not surprised?

You partisan buffoons keep acting like posting a social science study is somehow irrefutable evidence. That's not how social science or even most hard science works.

Also, as Amused already pointed out, you're missing the fact that Phokus started this response thread 10 minutes after the same topic was posted. Its a very trollish move and the thread should be locked. He could have just posted his statement in the other thread.

 

[soccerballtux]

yeah I'm probably for minimum wage.

 

[Phokus]

You partisan buffoons keep acting like posting a social science study is somehow irrefutable evidence. That's not how social science or even most hard science works.

Also, as Amused already pointed out, you're missing the fact that Phokus started this response thread 10 minutes after the same topic was posted. Its a very trollish move and the thread should be locked. He could have just posted his statement in the other thread.

Yes, clearly someone who can't add or read should be calling someone a 'buffoon'. Butthurt much?

A plurality are not 'against' minimum wage. I'm sorry that you're unable to read and add

37.7 + 14.3 = 52 (increase minimum wage crowd + keep it at the current level)

46.8 + 1.3 = 48.1 (decrease minimum wage + eliminate it)

 

[JSt0rm]

I know i should be quoting someone from ATPN but:

Liberal: "Why don't we heat the oven by a few degrees more, the bread will cook better/faster"
Conservative: "THE HEAT IS FINE AS IT IS, WHY DON'T WE UP THE HEAT TO 500 DEGREES WITH YOUR 'LOGIC' YOU LIBERAL COMMIE BASTARD?!?!"

hahhahaha exactly

 

[Patranus]

Minimum wage forces jobs over seas and prevents the free market from dictating reasonable wages.

Now we have a group of "poor" people who were made unemployed by the government.

At some point automation becomes cheaper than labor.

A perfect example of this was during the great depression people use to work as elevator operators. As the "progressives" perverted the constitution they passed the minimum wage law. At that point, it became cheaper to replace these people with automatic elevators. Now these people who were employed and WANTED the job and were willing to do it for their original wage were now out of a job. Thank you government, thank you "progressives", you just put these people on the street.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Minimum wage forces jobs over seas and prevents the free market from dictating reasonable wages.
Now we have a group of "poor" people who were made unemployed by the government.

The shame; depriving hard-working Americans of all those wonderful $100/week jobs...

 

[Patranus]

The shame; depriving hard-working Americans of all those wonderful $100/week jobs...

Great. So now the government can pay them $100 per week to contribute NOTHING to society. Perfect.