• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Effects of Minimum Wage

Results of Raising the Minimum Wage


  • Total voters
    40

ronpaulvoter

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
627
Reaction score
111
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What will raising the minimum wage do?

This is a test. Let's see how smart you are on the minimum wage.

Multiple choice. Check all that apply. Do not check those that don't.

Later, I will post the correct answers.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing there to choose.
 
What will raising the minimum wage do?

This is a test. Let's see how smart you are on the minimum wage.

Multiple choice. Check all that apply. Do not check those that don't.
Since there is no multiple choice, I'll opt for the 'short answer' response.

It creates a cndition of artifical inflation where the cost of products and services provided by minimum-wage labor go up due to extra-market forces - which eventually results in the "need" to raise minimum wage again.
 
The question cannot be answered unless we know what the minimum wage is you are talking about.
 
The question cannot be answered unless we know what the minimum wage is you are talking about.

The current one, of course.

However, the effect is the same. The only difference is, the greater the increase, the greater the effect.
 
What's particularly annoying about is that its proponents never consider its "unintended consequences." I think they expect businesses to take the wage increases entirely out of their bottom lines and not pass it on to the consumer in any way. Which is stupid in about fifty different ways.
 
What will raising the minimum wage do?

This is a test. Let's see how smart you are on the minimum wage.

Multiple choice. Check all that apply. Do not check those that don't.

Later, I will post the correct answers.


Labor regardless if it is legal or illegal on constitutes a small percentage of the total cost. So why would 7 dollars an hour have any effect? This minimum wage drives away jobs or some other crap is nothing but nonsense.

CNN.com - Transcripts
TUCKER: So what if wages rose and conditions improved dramatically? Would consumers have to dig a lot deeper into their pocket to pay for their fruits and vegetables?

The simple, bottom-line answer is no. In fact, wages could rise by 40 percent, according to one study, rising above the poverty level. And the average food bill for fresh fruits and vegetables would increase by less than $10 a year.

PROF. PHIL MARTIN, UNIV. OF CALIF. DAVIS: The important thing for Americans to understand is that they don't spend much on fresh fruits and vegetables, and farmers don't get very much of the retail dollar. On a $1 head of lettuce, the farmer gets about 18 cents, and the cost of wages and benefits is about six cents.

TUCKER: The average American family spends $370 on fresh fruits and veggies. Of that, only $65 goes to the farmer. Farm workers get $22 of the farmer's share. The remaining $305 is split up by the companies which transport the food, wholesalers, marketers, and grocery stores.


The Seattle Times: Local News: Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices
2003257249.gif


More than 7 million illegal immigrants work in the United States. They build houses, pick crops, slaughter cattle, stitch clothes, mow lawns, clean hotel rooms, cook restaurant meals and wash the dishes that come back.

You might assume that the plentiful supply of low-wage illegal workers would translate into significantly lower prices for the goods and services they produce. In fact, their impact on consumer prices — call it the "illegal-worker discount" — is surprisingly small.

The bag of Washington state apples you bought last weekend? Probably a few cents cheaper than it otherwise would have been, economists estimate. That steak dinner at a downtown restaurant? Maybe a buck off. Your new house in Subdivision Estates? Hard to say, but perhaps a few thousand dollars less expensive.

The underlying reason, economists say, is that for most goods the labor — whether legal or illegal, native- or foreign-born — represents only a sliver of the retail price.

Consider those apples — Washington's signature contribution to the American food basket.

At a local QFC, Red Delicious apples go for about 99 cents a pound. Of that, only about 7 cents represents the cost of labor, said Tom Schotzko, a recently retired extension economist at Washington State University. The rest represents the grower's other expenses, warehousing and shipping fees, and the retailer's markup.

And that's for one of the most labor-intensive crops in the state: It takes 150 to 190 hours of labor to grow and harvest an acre of apples, Schotzko said, compared to four hours for an acre of potatoes and 1 ½ hours for an acre of wheat.
 
Last edited:
The correct answers are:

Greater buying power
Greater unemployment
Higher prices
More businesses close

Obviously it's going to lead to greater buying power for the people who are working those jobs. In a select few cases (like Ford Motor Co. in the early 1900s), increased wages might increase buying power enough to offset some of the negative effects.

It will definitely lead to greater unemployment. This is a basic truism of economics: If you artificially increase the price of something (e.g. labor) above the market price, it's going to lead to a surplus.

It will generally lead to higher prices too. Businesses will pass at least part of that cost off to their consumers. And it will cause more businesses to close, especially in low-skill / low-profit industries like small retail.

Overall, the minimum wage is a net negative...and it prevents people whose labor is not worth $8 per hour from finding a job at all.
 
What will raising the minimum wage do?

This is a test. Let's see how smart you are on the minimum wage.

Multiple choice. Check all that apply. Do not check those that don't.

Later, I will post the correct answers.

And is this something that economists universally agree on?
 
I hope when the poll starter posts the "answer" he provides some type of empirical evidence to back up the inane dogma I am sure he will also bore me with.

The 10th anniversary of the minimum wage in the UK was a short time ago, as of yet millions of people have not lost their job because of it. The BBC just did a piece on the history of it which some may find interesting.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | When the left opposed a minimum wage

The National Minimum Wage celebrated its tenth birthday earlier this year.

For all the controversy when it was first introduced, amidst predictions that it would lead to an additional two million unemployed, it is now almost impossible to find any senior political figure who wants its repeal.
 
The only thing minimum wage affects is number of employees, at least directly. Assuming the minimum wage is binding, then it decreases the total amount of workers a firm can hire, and so forth decrease the amount of product they can supply. This decreases their maximum amount of revenue, and in some cases, this further decreases the amount of employees, resulting in a vicious cycle.
 
I hope when the poll starter posts the "answer" he provides some type of empirical evidence to back up the inane dogma I am sure he will also bore me with.

The 10th anniversary of the minimum wage in the UK was a short time ago, as of yet millions of people have not lost their job because of it. The BBC just did a piece on the history of it which some may find interesting.

BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | When the left opposed a minimum wage

The National Minimum Wage celebrated its tenth birthday earlier this year.

For all the controversy when it was first introduced, amidst predictions that it would lead to an additional two million unemployed, it is now almost impossible to find any senior political figure who wants its repeal.

Maybe so, but that is because the mininum wage was so low (as it is in the US) so it will have a very limited effect on employment.

I wish that the federal government in the US would abbolish the mininum wage so states could have their own level, but since the mininum wage has such a limited effect on labour costs it really doesn't even matter.

Inflation has eaten away the mininum wage so it is even lower then it was in the 70's despite the growing economy.
 
We have had a minimum wage in the United States since 1938. During the 70 years it has been in place there has never been any consistent correlation between any of the increases in minimum wage and inflation or a reduction in employment.

For example, take the 90s. We had 3 minimum wage increases in the 1990s, yet 22 million new jobs were created, inflation was held in check, and median incomes went up by around $7,500 adjusted (after inflation adjustments).

At the same time, we have had dozens of minimum wage increases over the last 70 years and you can't show any consistent correlation between them and a reduction of the poverty rate.

No correlation = no causation. Basically, the minimum wage increases we have had over the last 70 years have been so nominal that they have had no measurable effect on the economy at all good or bad. Sure, if you bump them up to 20 dollars an hour, you probably will see some fairly negative effects on employment. However, the minimum wage increases we have had are generally ones that just reflect prevailing low skilled entry level wages anyway. For the most part, the minimum wage is almost pointless. It does nothing demonstrable good or bad.
 
Labor regardless if it is legal or illegal on constitutes a small percentage of the total cost. So why would 7 dollars an hour have any effect? This minimum wage drives away jobs or some other crap is nothing but nonsense.
I worked in the food service industry for several years, during which time there were at least two (maybe three, its been a long time) hikes in minimum wage.

Every time it happened, it was followed by a price hike, with said hike doing nothing more than maintaining the % cost of labor -- which was right around 25%.
 
The only thing minimum wage affects is number of employees, at least directly. Assuming the minimum wage is binding, then it decreases the total amount of workers a firm can hire, and so forth decrease the amount of product they can supply. This decreases their maximum amount of revenue, and in some cases, this further decreases the amount of employees, resulting in a vicious cycle.

You're forgetting the other major effect, which is that employees make more.
 
We have had a minimum wage in the United States since 1938. During the 70 years it has been in place there has never been any consistent correlation between any of the increases in minimum wage and inflation or a reduction in employment.

For example, take the 90s. We had 3 minimum wage increases in the 1990s, yet 22 million new jobs were created, inflation was held in check, and median incomes went up by around $7,500 adjusted (after inflation adjustments).

At the same time, we have had dozens of minimum wage increases over the last 70 years and you can't show any consistent correlation between them and a reduction of the poverty rate.

No correlation = no causation. Basically, the minimum wage increases we have had over the last 70 years have been so nominal that they have had no measurable effect on the economy at all good or bad. Sure, if you bump them up to 20 dollars an hour, you probably will see some fairly negative effects on employment. However, the minimum wage increases we have had are generally ones that just reflect prevailing low skilled entry level wages anyway. For the most part, the minimum wage is almost pointless. It does nothing demonstrable good or bad.

Are you serious?

http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj5n1/cj5n1-6.pdf
The first federal minimum wage laws were established under the
provisions of the National Recovery Administration (NRA). The
National Industrial Recovery Act, which became law on 16 June
1933, established industrial minimum wages for 515 classes of labor.
Over 90 percent of the minimum wages were set at between 30 and
40 cents per hour.’ Early empirical evidence attests to the unemployment
effects of the minimum wage. Using the estimates of C. F.
Roos, who was the director ofresearch at the NRA, Benjamin Anderson
states: “Roos estimates that, by reason of the minimum wage
provisions of the codes, about 500,000 Negro workers were on relief
in 1934. Roos adds that a minimum wage definitely causes the displacement
of the young, inexperienced worker and the old worker.”2
With the passage of the FLSA, it became inevitable that major
dislocations would result in labor markets, primarily those for lowskilled
and low-wage workers. Although the act affected occupations
covering only one-fifth of the labor force,5 leaving a large uncovered
sector to minimize the disemployment effects, the minimum wage
was still extremely counterproductive. The Labor Department
admitted that the new minimum wage had a disemployment effect,
and one historian sympathetic to the minimum wage was forced to
concede that “[tihe Department of Labor estimated that the 25-centsan-
hour minimum wage caused about 30,000 to 50,000 to lose their
job. About 90% of these were in southern industries such as bagging,
pecan shelling, and tobacco stemming.”6

These estimates seriously understate the actual magnitude of the
damage. Since only 300,000 workers received an increase as a result
of the minimum wage,7 estimates of 30,000—50,000 lost jobs reveal
that 10—13 percent of those covered by the law lost their jobs. But it
is highly dubious that only 30,000—50,000 low-wage earners lost their
jobs in the entire country; that many unemployed could have been
found in the state of Texas alone, where labor authorities saw devastation
wrought via the minimum wage on the pecan trade. The
New York Times reported the following on 24 October 1938:

Information received today by State labor authorities indicated that
more than 40,000 employees of the pecan nut shelling plants in
Texas would be thrown out ofwork tomorrow by the closing down
of that industry, due to the new Wages and Hours Law, In San
Antonio, sixty plants, employing ten thousand men and women,
mostly Mexicans, will close.. . . Plant owners assert that they cannot
remain in business and pay the minimum wage of25 cents an hour
with a maximum working week of forty-four hours. Many garment
factories in Texas will also close.’

Democrats Cheer Wage Hike - washingtonpost.com
A minimum-wage increase 10 years ago cut 146,000 jobs from the restaurant industry and postponed 106,000 hires, according to a survey by the National Restaurant Association.

Evidence suggests that there may be some reduction in employment among the least skilled and the youngest workers, said Harry Holzer, professor of public policy at Georgetown University. But he added that inflation had so outpaced the minimum wage over the past decade that the negative effects could be limited.

This isn't even scratching the surface. There is TONS of evidence that minimum wage hurts employment.
 
Last edited:
We have had a minimum wage in the United States since 1938. During the 70 years it has been in place there has never been any consistent correlation between any of the increases in minimum wage and inflation or a reduction in employment.

For example, take the 90s. We had 3 minimum wage increases in the 1990s, yet 22 million new jobs were created, inflation was held in check, and median incomes went up by around $7,500 adjusted (after inflation adjustments).

At the same time, we have had dozens of minimum wage increases over the last 70 years and you can't show any consistent correlation between them and a reduction of the poverty rate.

No correlation = no causation. Basically, the minimum wage increases we have had over the last 70 years have been so nominal that they have had no measurable effect on the economy at all good or bad. Sure, if you bump them up to 20 dollars an hour, you probably will see some fairly negative effects on employment. However, the minimum wage increases we have had are generally ones that just reflect prevailing low skilled entry level wages anyway. For the most part, the minimum wage is almost pointless. It does nothing demonstrable good or bad.

Then there's no reason to have it (or any other law which does nothing).
 
You're forgetting the other major effect, which is that employees make more.

Not necessarily. Some workers will earn $8 per hour instead of $6 per hour...but others will earn $0 per hour instead of $6 per hour, because they get laid off.
 
Not necessarily. Some workers will earn $8 per hour instead of $6 per hour...but others will earn $0 per hour instead of $6 per hour, because they get laid off.

But when they find a new job, it'll be at $8 instead of $6, meaning an overall gain for them.
 
Which means it will have a pretty small effect overall, positive and negative.

Well yes, the minimum wage right now is pretty low, which is why people are basically split between those who want to abolish it and those who want to raise it, with very few in the middle.
 
Back
Top Bottom