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

241–250 of 381 posts

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

#241

Post by CydeWeys »

hinkley wrote: post #71
sobhaobnONJ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why this isn't a red herring. Minimum wage may be remaining stagnant but total employee compensation has been rising steadily, it's just that most of that compensation is in the form of spending on employee benefits like insurance. If people quit expecting employers to provide them with anything except for cold hard cash then you'd likely see wages increasing with time. To expand a bit more on this…

It's rare for a company to offer health insurance to employees who are pegged to minimum wage. If salaries are going down due to inflation, then you may have a point but it's a perverse one; medical costs are going up way faster than anything else. Both are reasons to support socialized medical coverage, but they don't really enter into this particular line of discussion.

Yup. You can't eat your medical insurance, nor can you live in it.

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

#242

Post by autoexec »

conanbatt wrote: post #210
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…

Who is to say what is the best wage? Should the government decide what people's wages should be? Should the government come to you and tell you specifically that your salary is not what you got from the exchange of labor with your employer and change it unilaterally? Minimum wage debates in economics aside, there is a core ideological issue where some people really do like the idea of controlling other people, and so…

> Who is to say what is the best wage? Should the government decide what people's wages should be?

I don't think the government should dictate exactly what a person's wage should be but setting a minimum makes perfect sense because otherwise businesses pay slave wages and use taxpayer money to subsidize their labor expenses.

As a taxpayer I don't want to my taxes spent on food stamps for employees working 40 hours a week just because some greedy company wants to put money that should go to those workers into their own pockets.

As a government, I wouldn't want the limited amount of available welfare funds going to people who are working to support themselves just because companies don't want to pay them a living wage.

You can argue all day that workers should be able to negotiate higher wages on their own and refuse to work for anyone who doesn't give them wages they consider fair, but we know that isn't an accurate description of reality. Some of the largest employers in the country have been a net drain on tax payers and directly contribute to high numbers of welfare recipients. Anti-union actions have weakened employee's ability to negotiate for fair compensation. Large corporations enter areas and eliminate competing businesses leaving local residents with fewer options for employment.

Like many cases, if companies hadn't exploited the system to the point where it is hurting people and causing a widespread harm I'd be more inclined to agree government should stay out of it, but that's where we are now.

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

#243

Post by jellicle »

BurningFrog wrote: post #237
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…

> In general, increasing pay into people at the bottom of the ladder The bottom of the ladder is the unemployed, who make $0/h. The good faith argument for no minimum wage is that those people would have a much bigger chance to find jobs and build job skills.

How will it improve your life to work 80 hours a week for 3 cents an hour, living in the USA? What can you purchase with your two dollars and forty cents (before tax) of weekly pay? What job skills will you be learning?

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

#244

Post by B4CKlash »

conanbatt wrote: post #210
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…

Who is to say what is the best wage? Should the government decide what people's wages should be? Should the government come to you and tell you specifically that your salary is not what you got from the exchange of labor with your employer and change it unilaterally? Minimum wage debates in economics aside, there is a core ideological issue where some people really do like the idea of controlling other people, and so…

>>Who is to say what is the best wage?

This isn't a complicated question but it's strange you're proposing it like it's unanswerable. We have plenty of models that help us understand price. I imagine you could easily establish a basket of goods which would be used as a proxy for a 'fair' market rate. Regardless, the means do not dictate the ends. If a minimum wages is deemed an effective way to increase economic growth, the solution might be an iterative one.

Additionally, the Government isn't deciding what 'Your' salary is. They are setting a floor for the labor market. Without a floor for wages the economy would devolve into feudalism. Employers are a cartel and they would use size to suppress wages at the benefit of shareholder profits.

Personally I'm all for the free-market. There are certain instances where two parties are not negotiating from an equal foothold. I think the labor/employer relationship is one of those systems.

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

#245

Post by Fjolsvith »

scarejunba wrote: post #163
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.

Much appreciated. And thank you to killjoywashere for selecting out the part of the paper that answers my question; gowld for reformatting appropriate to my mobile device. Apologies for not replying directly. I have a commenting rate-limiter applied to my account.

I, too, have a commenting rate-limiter applied to my account. I can only post about 5 comments in a day before HN tells me to "Slow Down, You're Posting Too Fast".

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

#246

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

Alex3917 wrote: post #230
danmaz74 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Higher minimum wage is a subsidy for tech companies though By which mechanism?

When you raise the minimum wage, it makes automation more effective in comparison. Which is why in NYC when they raised the minimum wage for fast food workers, most of the people at McDonald's who used to take orders just got replaced with kiosks. This is in effect a subsidy for the tech companies that automate labor, like the company that makes the McDonald's kiosks.

If a job can't be done for a livable wage, then we have to be willing to let those jobs go. Automate them, outsource them, let the companies who rely on exploitative labor fail -- the jobs are going to leave eventually anyway.

Meanwhile, we should funnel some of those productivity gains to build a robust social safety net (including education and job retraining) to give the displaced some dignity, and the ability to retool and become productive again if they so choose.

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

#247

Post by sachdevap »

Alex3917 wrote: post #230
danmaz74 wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Higher minimum wage is a subsidy for tech companies though By which mechanism?

When you raise the minimum wage, it makes automation more effective in comparison. Which is why in NYC when they raised the minimum wage for fast food workers, most of the people at McDonald's who used to take orders just got replaced with kiosks. This is in effect a subsidy for the tech companies that automate labor, like the company that makes the McDonald's kiosks.

That automation is in competition with minimum wage is unsubstantiated. And if companies innovate to get rid of the need for minimum wage jobs when min wage is raised, the society's response should not be to throttle innovation or keep lower minimum wage, but to institutionalize changes to how we redistribute the gains of that innovation.

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

#249

Post by andymockli »

CharlesColeman wrote: post #100
FabHK wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. It's good to challenge your views, so I'll listen in a bit. However, I must say that as an ex-libertarian (that left the creed because of its serious flaws) I am apprehensive about the neutrality of a show hosted by Tim Wood, a "Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist and paleolibertarian" (Wikipedia) that's received fellowships from the Institute for Humane Studies (funded by the Scaifes, Kochs, etc.). EDIT to add: h…

> I am apprehensive about the neutrality of a show... I'd also assume any show that bills itself as "Paul Krugman's column refuted, week after week!" is more of an ideological security blanket than real intellectual engagement or critique.

I'd personally categorize Paul Krugman as an idealogue. You might think the same of Bob Murphy and Tom Woods, but the aim was to offer a counterpoint to Krugman's ideas.

I believe you'd find the intellectual engagement and critiques within the podcast, not the subtitle.

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

#250

Post by everdev »

BurningFrog wrote: post #237
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…

> In general, increasing pay into people at the bottom of the ladder The bottom of the ladder is the unemployed, who make $0/h. The good faith argument for no minimum wage is that those people would have a much bigger chance to find jobs and build job skills.

There's still the challenge of overhead that comes with onboarding and managing a new full-time or part-time worker.

Most companies hiring for minimum wage positions want a respectful employee who will show up on time. I don't think they'd bend on those requirements for cheaper labor as the management overhead would quickly eat into any cost savings.

So, while I understand it's a "good faith argument", I don't think it holds much water. Companies will just use a no-minimum wage environment to negotiate cheaper deals with employees they would have hired anyway.

Also, one's salary is in large part due to one's ability to negotiate. A manager who hires dozens of workers a year is probably pretty good at negotiating while a low-income worker might not be experienced in that area. The minimum wage also helps correct that imbalance in negotiating power.

Post reply on HN