 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
MisterOpus1
Grumpy Old Fart

Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
|
|
While economics does indeed base itself on prediction, it also largely bases itself on past trends. So with that, what's some evidence of increasing minimum wage and business impact?:
| quote: | A 1998 EPI study failed to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 minimum wage increase. In fact, following the most recent increase in the minimum wage in 1996-97, the low-wage labor market performed better than it had in decades (e.g., lower unemployment rates, increased average hourly wages, increased family income, decreased poverty rates).
Studies of the 1990-91 federal minimum wage increase, as well as studies by David Card and Alan Krueger of several state minimum wage increases, also found no measurable negative impact on employment.
New economic models that look specifically at low-wage labor markets help explain why there is little evidence of job loss associated with minimum wage increases. These models recognize that employers may be able to absorb some of the costs of a wage increase through higher productivity, lower recruiting and training costs, decreased absenteeism, and increased worker morale.
A recent Fiscal Policy Institute (FPI) study of state minimum wages found no evidence of negative employment effects on small businesses.
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/i...ge_minwagefacts |
and
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/briefingpapers_bp150
and
| quote: | The 1996 and 1997 minimum wage increases raised the wages of almost 10 million workers. About 71% of these workers were adults and 58% were women. Just under half (46%) worked full time and another third worked 20 to 34 hours per week.
The average minimum wage worker is responsible for providing more than half (54%) of his or her family's weekly earnings.
The two-stage increase disproportionately benefited low-income working households. Although households in the bottom 20% of the income distribution (whose average income is $15,728) receive only 5% of total family income, they received 35% of the benefits from the minimum wage increase.
Four different tests of the two increases' employment impact - applied to a large number of demographic groups whose wages are sensitive to the minimum wage - fail to find any systematic, significant job loss associated with the 1996-97 increases. Not only are the estimated employment effects generally economically small and statistically insignificant, they are also almost as likely to be positive as negative.
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/studies_stmwp
http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/wages/minimumwage.htm |
and
http://www.ocpp.org/1999/es032399.htm
and
http://www.ocpp.org/1999/es990602.htm
and
http://www.levy.org/docs/pn/99-6.html
To conclude, there is no direct evidence that raising minimum wage has any overall negative impact on jobs, small businesses, or the economy in general. If anything, evidence points towards the opposite.
In a time when we are waayy behind on increasing the minimum wage to keep up with inflation, Bush takes that away to essentially fuck the people that need $ the most. That is unbelievable.
Edited for Shakka 
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
Last edited by MisterOpus1 on Sep-09-2005 at 17:49
|
|
Sep-09-2005 17:09
|
|
|
 |
 |
MisterOpus1
Grumpy Old Fart

Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Quick, draw a graph. Minimum wage is a price floor, which theoretically creates a supply/demand mismatch, much like rent controls are a price ceiling, generally creating a supply/demand mismatch. Whether or not it ultimately manifests itself as greater unemployment or what have you, it no doubt creates inefficiency in the system at a time when maximum efficiency is desireable in order to rebuild the city as quickly and cost effectively as possible. If a person doesn't want to work for an hourly wage that they feel is unacceptable, nobody's gonna hold a gun to their head and make them do it. YAY FREE MARKET ECONOMICS! YAY LAISSEZ FAIR! YAY INVISIBLE HAND!
Take off your tin foil hat and try to see it from a different perspective. I don't think the motive is to enslave black people in New Orleans.
Rock over London, Rock on Chicago. Wheaties, the Breakfast of Champions. |
Stupid word on my part. I'll edit my post after this one. No I don't think it's enslavement of the po blacks. I do think it's bad business, however. To me this is Bush's way of saving a few $ here and there by cutting corners.
Well here's another thought on saving a few bucks to help pay for the rebuilding - roll back the tax cuts on the top 1%. What would that give - some $600 billion? And you wouldn't have to hurt the people that make the country's economic boost the most - the middle class. They can keep their cuts.
So there's a thought that might need a little more digesting. Rather than cut the pay of people who don't earn shit in the first place - we can keep their pay normal, WATCH Halliburton a bit more closely (for obvious reasons on their record in Iraq), and roll back the taxes on those who need it the least.
Just a thought.
___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...
|
|
Sep-09-2005 17:48
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:31.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|