From the Economist
It is probable that the minimum wage increase will not cost enough jobs to make its effects readily distinguishable from random economic variation. It is also probable that it will improve the lot of a few poor people, though not many, as fewer than 20% of those who earn the minimum wage live in poor households now. On the other hand, it also seems probable that much of any benefit that goes to poor families will come out of the pockets of other poor people—very probably even poorer people, such as convicts, who are currently barely hanging onto the fringes of the labour force. . . .
CEO's who support higher minimum wages are not, as the media often casts them, renegade heros speaking truth to power because their inner moral voice bids them be silent no more. They are by and large, like Mr Sinegal, the heads of companies that pay well above the minimum wage. Forcing up the labour costs of their competitors, while simultaneously collecting good PR for "daring" to support a higher minimum, is a terrific business move.
Economics 101
Here's the link. http://www.economist.com/debate/freeexc ... uch_as.cfm
Simply put, free markets work. Distort markets with misguided regulations and you are more likely than not to hurt those you intended to help. Good intentions aren't what's important. Results are what matters. That is not to say all regulations are bad. Pollution controls benefit most of us by preventing industry from externalizing (dumping pollution) some of their costs.
But that's very arbitrary. Would you have them (any wage guidlines) done away with entirely? There are recent examples of increase showing no negative effect but even a net positive effect. Less than half the states are currently at the Fed. minimum wage. Would you agree to having a minimum wage indexed to the basics of living?
thats sweet you can read the economist online instead of paying $90 a year for a subscription
i haven't thought about the issue enough to really make a call yet
what would you say to the fact that productivity has been steadily rising yet real wages have been stagnate for the past 30 years? perhaps other forms of compensation?
i haven't thought about the issue enough to really make a call yet
what would you say to the fact that productivity has been steadily rising yet real wages have been stagnate for the past 30 years? perhaps other forms of compensation?
I hate economics, but I do listen to the various sides, but at some point my eyes glaze over. I'm more curious now about your other thread bemoaning the current state of Liberal views compared to the Liberal views you once found acceptable. My eyes glaze over every single time I think of a certain John Galt speech but that seems to be more in line with your market confidence. I think there is an insulating effect created by the free market that is enjoyed by wealth at the expense of others and find room for a bit more regulation than most Libertarians. I've got a streak of altruism to deal with too that I'll explain away as a necessary long term investment that the market doesn't seem to care much about anymore.
Yet they've enjoyed the infrastructure that came from such far sightedness but would be so slow to materialize starting from scratch.
Yet they've enjoyed the infrastructure that came from such far sightedness but would be so slow to materialize starting from scratch.
gulliver wrote: "what would you say to the fact that productivity has been steadily rising yet real wages have been stagnate for the past 30 years?"
What's goes unconsidered in talk about "real wages" etc. is the qualitative nature of what those wages buy today. A cell phone, personal computer, digital camera, internet access, spring loaded cams, sticky rubber and waterproof breathable rainwear, along with a powerful, safe, fuel efficient, automobile with computerized fuel management and pollution control systems are among the trappings of the average thirty year old climber's life. Heck, lots of teenagers have all the above. In the 1960s, millions of dollars couldn't have bought the stuff that almost every climber with a job can have today.
What's goes unconsidered in talk about "real wages" etc. is the qualitative nature of what those wages buy today. A cell phone, personal computer, digital camera, internet access, spring loaded cams, sticky rubber and waterproof breathable rainwear, along with a powerful, safe, fuel efficient, automobile with computerized fuel management and pollution control systems are among the trappings of the average thirty year old climber's life. Heck, lots of teenagers have all the above. In the 1960s, millions of dollars couldn't have bought the stuff that almost every climber with a job can have today.