Wage laws

[ThinkCritically]

You are right I have no evidence that this is true, except the millions of mexicans that find work below minimum wage.

That proves nothing except that if businesses can find a way around the minimum wage laws, they will. Also that we need to enforce the laws against hiring illegal immigrants better.

It proves everything. Businesses if given the chance, will hire more below minimum wage mexicans (a.k.a low skill workers) than people that get minimum wage. Disqualifying them from this economic result because they are illegal is disingenuous.

You are right, businesses will not go without necessary employees as a cost adjustment, but you do not account for the slightly less necessary employees that they might hire if they were cheaper than minimum wage.

A well-run business never hires unnecessary staff. If they don't need the help, the money is wasted, no matter how low the wages are.

Would they not layoff staff if minimum wage was raised? what do you think all those companies that hire cheap mexican labor would do if they had to increase wages to minimum wage? Massive layoffs.

Let me check and see if I can find some special interest group that has manipulated the data just right. If its empirical after all then it must be true.

Well, what is certainly the case is that if you don't bother checking your theoretical predictions against observation in the real world, you are bound to run into a lot of mistakes.

Tell that to the ghost of Friedman, he is the one I first learned this concept from. He didn't have any empirical evidence either, but again i'm sure I could find some special interest group out there that fits my argument.

 

[Dragon]

It proves everything. Businesses if given the chance, will hire more below minimum wage mexicans (a.k.a low skill workers) than people that get minimum wage.

Sure, but what you need to prove is not that, but that they would let all those Mexicans go and have a shrunken labor force if they DID have to pay the immigrants minimum wage. Naturally, if they can sneak by paying lower wages and get away with it, they will, but so what?

Would they not layoff staff if minimum wage was raised?

No, and the reason I know this, is that it hasn't happened any time that the minimum wage WAS raised in the past.

Tell that to the ghost of Friedman, he is the one I first learned this concept from.

Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ThinkCritically]

It proves everything. Businesses if given the chance, will hire more below minimum wage mexicans (a.k.a low skill workers) than people that get minimum wage.

Sure, but what you need to prove is not that, but that they would let all those Mexicans go and have a shrunken labor force if they DID have to pay the immigrants minimum wage. Naturally, if they can sneak by paying lower wages and get away with it, they will, but so what?

Would they not layoff staff if minimum wage was raised?

No, and the reason I know this, is that it hasn't happened any time that the minimum wage WAS raised in the past.

Tell that to the ghost of Friedman, he is the one I first learned this concept from.

Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

editing my statements and giving half answers to them isn't going to convince me.
Why don't you go back and try again?

 

[Dragon]

editing my statements and giving half answers to them isn't going to convince me.
Why don't you go back and try again?

Nah, you've just proven yourself too ignorant and closed-minded to bother with. Anyone who understands the subject will follow what I posted already. If you don't, that's not my problem.

 

[ThinkCritically]

editing my statements and giving half answers to them isn't going to convince me.
Why don't you go back and try again?

Nah, you've just proven yourself too ignorant and closed-minded to bother with. Anyone who understands the subject will follow what I posted already. If you don't, that's not my problem.

I do understand the subject, and I do follow what you posted, and it is half quotes and half answers.
I guess you win though, well played. Let me know if you ever decide to go back and actually answer my explicit questions.

by the way... calling someone names is a coverup for a week argument

 

[starcraftzzz]

It proves everything. Businesses if given the chance, will hire more below minimum wage mexicans (a.k.a low skill workers) than people that get minimum wage.

Sure, but what you need to prove is not that, but that they would let all those Mexicans go and have a shrunken labor force if they DID have to pay the immigrants minimum wage. Naturally, if they can sneak by paying lower wages and get away with it, they will, but so what?



No, and the reason I know this, is that it hasn't happened any time that the minimum wage WAS raised in the past.

Tell that to the ghost of Friedman, he is the one I first learned this concept from.

Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

editing my statements and giving half answers to them isn't going to convince me.
Why don't you go back and try again?

WEll given that you are to stupid to think I dont anything will convince you toa ccept reality

 

[ThinkCritically]

Sure, but what you need to prove is not that, but that they would let all those Mexicans go and have a shrunken labor force if they DID have to pay the immigrants minimum wage. Naturally, if they can sneak by paying lower wages and get away with it, they will, but so what?



No, and the reason I know this, is that it hasn't happened any time that the minimum wage WAS raised in the past.



Argument from authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

editing my statements and giving half answers to them isn't going to convince me.
Why don't you go back and try again?

WEll given that you are to stupid to think I dont anything will convince you toa ccept reality

thanks for the insight. could you please teach me?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Don't need them. In fact they hurt low skill workers the most.

With such an in depth analysis, how could you be wrong?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Yep. Not really much content there, but I agree. If you want to help poor people, do it with a negative income tax, not with wage regulations.

We already have a negative income tax, its called the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the right is opposed to it.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Yep pay people less in a consumer spending based economy, real bright stuff there.

How is that statement even coherent, in your mind? Aside from the fact that the argument against minimum wage is that it lowers employment more than it increases income, and so you actually get more consumer spending by lowering the minimum wage, what point are you trying to make? That just continually expanding consumer demand somehow increases output and real income rather than just resulting in inflation? I don't care so much for the basic AD/AS model, but you really need to learn it dude.

Why do we need models? Hasn't the minimum wage been raised before? Well - what happened? Did it wreak havoc on the economy?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You've got to be a really super duper worthless idiot if you need a minimum wage law. Gawd, how pitiful, I'd have to put myself out of my own misery it I was that damn stoopid and hopeless.

Just remember folks - its the left wing that is full of elitist snobs.


"If you make less money than me - kill yourself!"

Problem with that plan, genius, is that you'd become the poorest person in America

 

[Widdekind]

Supply & Demand -- as the "Price" (wages) of labor "Supplied" increases, the "Demand" (employment) for that labor "Product" decreases

Yes, yes, I know the theory, but it only holds to the extent the market is elastic, which in turn only holds to the extent that the purchaser can forego making the purchase.

The labor market is not particularly price-elastic. You do not see demand drop as price rises, nor do you see demand increase as price drops, except in rare occasions when outsourcing is possible and thus competition becomes effective, which is not the case with minimum-wage jobs in the U.S., almost all of which are service jobs that HAVE to be done on-site and so can't be outsourced.

true -- for "necessary" jobs, for which "necessary" workers have, and can leverage, economic power over employers (to capture some of the employers', i.e. "Labor Consumers", economic "Consumer Surplus")

false -- for "non-necessary" jobs, whose current non-existence, in our minimum-wage economy, your analysis overlooks, i.e. "but what about all the 'otherwise-would-have' jobs ?"

you have "set the bar at the minimum wage"; observed "all of those workers who still made it"; and concluded that "everybody made it". Such is non-logical & non-valid -- we live in an economy "stripped" of all sub-minimum-wage "potential" jobs; none are performed; you are over-looking their loss

 

[ThinkCritically]

Yep pay people less in a consumer spending based economy, real bright stuff there.

How is that statement even coherent, in your mind? Aside from the fact that the argument against minimum wage is that it lowers employment more than it increases income, and so you actually get more consumer spending by lowering the minimum wage, what point are you trying to make? That just continually expanding consumer demand somehow increases output and real income rather than just resulting in inflation? I don't care so much for the basic AD/AS model, but you really need to learn it dude.

Why do we need models? Hasn't the minimum wage been raised before? Well - what happened? Did it wreak havoc on the economy?

Let me clarify because I have probably been making a weak argument.

1.Labor is a product just like anything else, it is bought and sold on the market place. I think we can all agree with that.

2. When a price floor is created for a product it eliminates the demand for the inframarginal supply of that product that would be bought (this is dead weight loss). Usually when the government sets price floors they buy up the dead weight loss to make up for the DWL that occurs. Care to take a guess how the government does this in the labor market?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

How is that statement even coherent, in your mind? Aside from the fact that the argument against minimum wage is that it lowers employment more than it increases income, and so you actually get more consumer spending by lowering the minimum wage, what point are you trying to make? That just continually expanding consumer demand somehow increases output and real income rather than just resulting in inflation? I don't care so much for the basic AD/AS model, but you really need to learn it dude.

Why do we need models? Hasn't the minimum wage been raised before? Well - what happened? Did it wreak havoc on the economy?

Let me clarify because I have probably been making a weak argument.

1.Labor is a product just like anything else, it is bought and sold on the market place. I think we can all agree with that.

2. When a price floor is created for a product it eliminates the demand for the inframarginal supply of that product that would be bought (this is dead weight loss). Usually when the government sets price floors they buy up the dead weight loss to make up for the DWL that occurs. Care to take a guess how the government does this in the labor market?

So you're saying that without minimum wage, magically everyone whose labor is worth less than minimum wage will go get jobs making $0.50 an hour and they'll be able to support themselves like that?


The lower the poors' wages are the more they have to rely on government assistance. Do you really think a family of 4 making $20,000 a year on minimum wage will need less government assistance if their wages are cut in half?

Of course - the right wings solution is simply to ignore the bottom 1/3 of society. Pay them 10 cents an hour and if they starve to death, who cares, the free market decided it so its OK. its not like hungry angry masses have ever violently overthrown the upper class.

EDIT:
There ARE several advanced nations without minumum wage laws, like Germany, but in these countries the unions have actual power, and there is an effective minimum wage. This highlights what the right really want - big business setting the wages. An individual employee has very little negotiating power over a big corporation - but a union does. But the right doesn't want that. They want Corp. X to set the wages you can work for them or die.

 

[inALIENable]

2. When a price floor is created for a product it eliminates the demand for the inframarginal supply of that product that would be bought (this is dead weight loss). Usually when the government sets price floors they buy up the dead weight loss to make up for the DWL that occurs. Care to take a guess how the government does this in the labor market?

Let me guess, let me guess.. . They send the dead weight off to die in wars? Such a waste, a (soylent) green solution would be better.

 

[ThinkCritically]

So you're saying that without minimum wage, magically everyone whose labor is worth less than minimum wage will go get jobs making $0.50 an hour and they'll be able to support themselves like that?

what i am saying is that without minimum wage laws some members of the labor force will become affordable, but as long as they are not affordable they will not be hired. If they are not hired then they are making less than $0.50 an hour, to be exact they are making zero dollars. How is someone supposed to support themselves like that.

The lower the poors' wages are the more they have to rely on government assistance. Do you really think a family of 4 making $20,000 a year on minimum wage will need less government assistance if their wages are cut in half?

You are right, the poorer people are the more they have to rely on government assistance. I am not arguing against that. I am simply stating what happens when price floors occur.

Of course - the right wings solution is simply to ignore the bottom 1/3 of society. Pay them 10 cents an hour and if they starve to death, who cares, the free market decided it so its OK. its not like hungry angry masses have ever violently overthrown the upper class.

I'm not sure how politics got into this, but there isn't a single economist in the world that would disagree with what I have said in regards to price floors. How we care for the poor is another discussion, but there is no doubt that price floors in the labor market make some people unaffordable thus those individuals are never hired.

There ARE several advanced nations without minumum wage laws, like Germany, but in these countries the unions have actual power, and there is an effective minimum wage. This highlights what the right really want - big business setting the wages. An individual employee has very little negotiating power over a big corporation - but a union does. But the right doesn't want that. They want Corp. X to set the wages you can work for them or die.

Union pay is no where close to minimum wage, so I would disagree that union pay is an effective minimum wage. As far as what crony capitalist politicians want that is another story. I do believe that individuals should have the right to organize, but again we aren't talking about skilled union workers. I'm talking about poor people with very little to no skill or experience. There are two ways to improve your lot in life. Education and experience. If the DWL members of the work force never get employed then they will never gain any experience.

 

[starcraftzzz]

How is that statement even coherent, in your mind? Aside from the fact that the argument against minimum wage is that it lowers employment more than it increases income, and so you actually get more consumer spending by lowering the minimum wage, what point are you trying to make? That just continually expanding consumer demand somehow increases output and real income rather than just resulting in inflation? I don't care so much for the basic AD/AS model, but you really need to learn it dude.

Why do we need models? Hasn't the minimum wage been raised before? Well - what happened? Did it wreak havoc on the economy?

Let me clarify because I have probably been making a weak argument.

1.Labor is a product just like anything else, it is bought and sold on the market place. I think we can all agree with that.

2. When a price floor is created for a product it eliminates the demand for the inframarginal supply of that product that would be bought (this is dead weight loss). Usually when the government sets price floors they buy up the dead weight loss to make up for the DWL that occurs. Care to take a guess how the government does this in the labor market?

1) No Labor is not just like any another good. (ill explain in number 2)
2) As shown by all the evidence minimum wage increases result in increased productivity; of which occurs due to signnifi9cnaly lower employee turnover, better living standards, happier workers and workers who feel their work is actually worth doing.
Also higher minimum wages results in more people looking for jobs and therefor companies are able to hire more skilled people whoa re more productivity.

 

[starcraftzzz]

So you're saying that without minimum wage, magically everyone whose labor is worth less than minimum wage will go get jobs making $0.50 an hour and they'll be able to support themselves like that?

what i am saying is that without minimum wage laws some members of the labor force will become affordable, but as long as they are not affordable they will not be hired. If they are not hired then they are making less than $0.50 an hour, to be exact they are making zero dollars. How is someone supposed to support themselves like that.

I have a question. Isn't a good thing to not make it easier for people to get shitty paying jobs and instead of working in a job were they produce $1 in goods an hour they should find a job that actually contributes more production?

 

[ThinkCritically]

1) No Labor is not just like any another good. (ill explain in number 2)

As far as the firm is concerned there is no difference

2) As shown by all the evidence minimum wage increases result in increased productivity; of which occurs due to signnifi9cnaly lower employee turnover, better living standards, happier workers and workers who feel their work is actually worth doing.

I agree that there is a correlation between productivity and wages, but correlation does not prove causation. Case in point, the opposite could be said as well (increased productivity is rewarded with higher wages).
And yes higher wages should decrease employee turnover, and increase living standards, thus leading to happier workers, but at the expense of the DWL labor members. Which is my point to begin with.

Also higher minimum wages results in more people looking for jobs and therefor companies are able to hire more skilled people whoa re more productivity.

You are right here as well, "higher minimum wages results in more people looking for jobs" but looking for jobs and getting hired are two different stories. There are a lot of jobs that pay millions of dollars and people look for them, but will they get hired? Firms still will not hire the inframarginal supply of laborers that it would due to price floors in the labor market

 

[Skull Pilot]

they hurt low skill workers the most.

if the "job ladder" does not "reach down to the poor"; then they will have no way of "climbing" out of poverty; and will rely on charity, i.e. "welfare doles"

It doesn't matter where the bottom rung on a ladder is as long as one wishes to actually climb.