Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 381 posts

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#181

Post by ajross »

larnmar wrote: post #178
ajross wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, can you cite some of the "Some" who would say that? I'm not aware of any serious research showing that minimum wage laws actually hurt "some of the poor" (I mean, like all regulation, they aren't perfectly targetted), but would be curious to see it.

In the US, for instance, you have a massive (and very deliberately created) population of illegal aliens who can’t legally work anyway, so are unaffected by minimum wage laws. Raising minimum wage has the effect of making legal employees even less competitive with illegal ones, and since the authorities have no interest in enforcing their own laws, legal employment at the unskilled end is a sucker’s game. This, I sus…

Right, but what's the evidence for that? I get the argument you're making (and the nativist agenda behind it), but... it's literally disputed by the linked article. I mean, at some point one has to give up and just admit that maybe the analysis was wrong, right? Political facts still have to be facts in the real world, eventually, and thus subject to reason, right?

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#182

Post by cosmodisk »

atypicality wrote: post #2

Axios cherry picked the Bureau of Labor Statistics data for the 12 states that confirm the writer's bias. They should have analyzed all states with low minimum wages vs high minimum wages for the overall picture. Reports are out there showing while many of the minimum wage earners who have not lost jobs from the hourly increase are reporting weekly scheduled hours being cut back across the board.

To me this is still positive. If one was making 40h x $10 and now does 31h x $13, it means the person has more time to invest in oneself,maybe do some community college course or whatever. I'd be more than happy if my CEO would give me Fridays off instead of giving a pay rise.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#183

Post by Izkata »

pwthornton wrote: post #168

How many of the people arguing for keeping the minimum wage unchanged were arguing that in good faith? In general, increasing pay into people at the bottom of the ladder has a much bigger economic effect than the opposite. Reasonable increases in the minimum wage, particularly ones that track inflation and cost of living are not going to harm the economy. As many have pointed out, the minimum wage in many places has…

> How many of the people arguing for keeping the minimum wage unchanged were arguing that in good faith?

> Reasonable increases in the minimum wage, particularly ones that track inflation and cost of living are not going to harm the economy.

My understanding is that plenty of the arguments against it are from people concerned about the areas of the country still near the federal minimum. It's absolutely a good-faith argument concerning what they see as an unreasonable jump, of ~double the previous amount, instead of a reasonable increase.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#184

Post by atypicality »

asdff wrote: post #153
xyzzyz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Americans would starve and die of exposure on those wages. No, they wouldn’t. Americans survived on wages lower than that in the past. They would simply have to adjust their lifestyle to look more like the one of Bangladeshi —- unless you assume that Americans are somehow extremely inept compared to Bangladeshi.

Are you implying that the people currently starving and dieing of exposure living in bangladeshi-style slums right on the streets of San Fransisco is an acceptable outcome? We should be paying more people a wage that forces them to live like that? Or do we look at the growing inequality in this country and realize we can definitely afford to add a couple bucks to a poor guys hourly rate so he doesn't have to give 60%…

What do you have against landlords? Every situation has an economic element to it. It shouldn't be assumed that every person who is a boss, landlord or business owner is assumed to be some sort of crook for having money. Maybe the landlord is upside down on his property and takes a loss every month. You just don't know.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#185

Post by IanCal »

apcragg wrote: post #92
pge wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The plot is showing that there is a negative selection bias in the reporting of stories about minimum wage. That is, that stories suggesting that increasing minimum wage has negative effects (increases unemployment, etc) are overreported relative to stories showing a positive effect from an increase in minimum wage. I am only repeating what the paper says; I don't claim to have validated their methodology or sources.

That is an incomplete summary. Their conclusion is that despite this larger than normal selection bias, the minimum wage appears to have no impact on unemployment. The paper's abstract, discussion, and summary all mention this as part of the central thesis - why leave it out?

It is an incomplete summary of the paper, however it seems to be a pretty solid summary of what the plot is telling us.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#186

Post by atypicality »

cosmodisk wrote: post #182
atypicality wrote: post #2

Axios cherry picked the Bureau of Labor Statistics data for the 12 states that confirm the writer's bias. They should have analyzed all states with low minimum wages vs high minimum wages for the overall picture. Reports are out there showing while many of the minimum wage earners who have not lost jobs from the hourly increase are reporting weekly scheduled hours being cut back across the board.

To me this is still positive. If one was making 40h x $10 and now does 31h x $13, it means the person has more time to invest in oneself,maybe do some community college course or whatever. I'd be more than happy if my CEO would give me Fridays off instead of giving a pay rise.

It might work out for you personally but it still doesn't address the issue of not making a living wage. If their weekly paycheck isn't any more than it was, they're still coming up short on their monthly expenses.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#187

Post by akvadrako »

fwip wrote: post #148
akvadrako wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are unrelated; countries need a social safety net regardless of what the minimum wage is. You might even argue that the higher you make min wage, the more important social services are, because you have taken away the ability of low-skilled workers to support themselves.

On the contrary, places with a robust social service net don't need as strong labor protections, as they're able to decline to sell their labor.

You’re right - in that direction they are related. Since a safety net is always needed, there is just no good reason to have minimum wage.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#188

Post by boomboomsubban »

kangnkodos wrote: post #129
boomboomsubban wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This creates a scenario where a dollar into the insurance budget yields more than a dollar worth of value Using this same logic, a better use of that dollar would be spending it on taxes as the even larger government can negotiate even better rates with healthcare providers, providing even more value to the employee. Instead, the company fights to keep that dollar so they can spend it as they see fit, and the employ…

"government can negotiate even better rates" Yes. Up to a point. It's true that in general, the government currently pays less than private insurers. What's not clear is what happens if/when the government is the only one paying hospitals to keep their doors open. At the reduced rate, hospitals will have hard choices to make. Only about 20% of hospitals are for-profit. For the other 80%, less money coming in the door…

>What's not clear is what happens if/when the government is the only one paying hospitals to keep their doors open.

What isn't clear about this? The government pays the hospitals to keep their doors open.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#189

Post by beatgammit »

atypicality wrote: post #186
cosmodisk wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me this is still positive. If one was making 40h x $10 and now does 31h x $13, it means the person has more time to invest in oneself,maybe do some community college course or whatever. I'd be more than happy if my CEO would give me Fridays off instead of giving a pay rise.

It might work out for you personally but it still doesn't address the issue of not making a living wage. If their weekly paycheck isn't any more than it was, they're still coming up short on their monthly expenses.

And if they're not making enough, they may need to work two jobs where they were working one, which results in less time (though maybe a little more money).

There are a lot of variables here that need to be examined before we can decide whether it's largely a success.

Re: Job loss predictions over rising minimum wages haven't come true

#190

Post by babesh »

qzx_pierri wrote: post #180
pwthornton wrote: post #168

How many of the people arguing for keeping the minimum wage unchanged were arguing that in good faith? In general, increasing pay into people at the bottom of the ladder has a much bigger economic effect than the opposite. Reasonable increases in the minimum wage, particularly ones that track inflation and cost of living are not going to harm the economy. As many have pointed out, the minimum wage in many places has…

This is true, but people who argue for it most vocally refuse to acknowledge the fact that it’s not economically feasible to reward the lowest paid people with a MUCH MORE than comfortable lifestyle. The minimum wage is for two things: To prevent the exploitation of workers at a certain level, and to allow workers to support themselves. Some people also fail to realize that there will always be poor people. The only…

The implication is that minorities that have been historically discriminated against and are disproportionately poor will have fewer kids. This is a bad idea that people have 'tried' in the past and is ripe for abuse.
Post reply on HN