The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Economics

Economics For discussion about economics, financial markets, investing, stock markets, finance, and economic theory


Thanks Tree15Thanks
  • 2 Post By Supposn
  • 1 Post By Supposn
  • 2 Post By Supposn
  • 1 Post By David
  • 1 Post By David
  • 1 Post By tecoyah
  • 1 Post By Supposn
  • 1 Post By Supposn
  • 1 Post By Archie Goodwin
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 19th, 2015, 06:24 AM   #1
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Why the minimum wage does not reduce jobs.

Why the minimum wage does not reduce jobs.

Job creations were generally not due to altruistic motives; enterprises speculated that there would be a favorable cost-benefit to justify those jobs. After each of the federal minimum wage, (FMW) rate increases, employers continued to perceive favorable cost-benefits for almost all of their jobs.

Some eliminated jobs were replaced by automation. Automation, (i.e. increasing production at lesser per/unit cost) has always been to our economic benefit.
The numbers of jobs made extinct due to computers were replaced by jobs in a completely new industry. Previously we did not attempt to digest and process huge volumes of data that people are now handling; those are additional jobs.

Each increase of the FMW rate to some extent induced increased the purchasing powers for ALL USA wages and salaries thus to some extent our economy was consequently better than otherwise; (otherwise being if the FMW rate had not been increased).
Due to our more (than otherwise) improved better than otherwise economy, USA’s economy had supported more (than otherwise) numbers jobs with wage rates that are more than otherwise. [Otherwise being if the purchasing power of the FMW rate is reduced or if it’s eliminated.]

That’s why libertarians predicted increases of unemployment due to each proposed FMW rate increase did not meet their expectations; those enacted increases have always been to our net economic benefit.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from tecoyah and numan
Supposn is offline  
Old November 19th, 2015, 10:00 AM   #2
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

[QUOTE=Aufgeblassen;55664]But then there is the consideration of goods & services [increases due to the federal minimum wage's rate] that increase proportionally with wages, since (unlike the gov't.) companies CANNOT print money!!! - hello?!

Aufgeblassen, the federal minimum wage, (FMW) rate’s support of the lowest half of USA employees’ incomes is significant and regarding our lowest fifth of all full time employees it is of critical significance.

Inflation, (the U.S. dollar’s loss of purchasing power continues to occur regardless of our FMW rate’s modification or lack of modification.

Costs of goods and service products attributable to labor varies but it is usually a fraction rather than 100% of a product’s cost.

FMW rate increases are proportionally more beneficial to low wage rate earners and of lesser benefit to higher rate earners.
Thus USA’s aggregate salaries and wage rate changes due to modification of the FMW rate are proportionally less than the change of the FMW rate.
Rates of labor contributing to the aggregate cost of a product varies but unless all work is performed by those earning exactly the minimum wage rate, the variable modification of labor costs attributable to the modification of the FMW rate is less than 100%.

Due to the afore mentioned variable factors, the proportion of goods and service products price increases due to increases of the FMW rate are proportionally much less than the increase of the FMW rate.
The FMW rate is much less a cause and much more a victim of U.S. dollar’s inflation. Permitting the FMW rate to lag behind our currency’s inflation reduces the purchasing power of our minimum and our median wage rates and is of detriment to our economy.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from numan
Supposn is offline  
Old November 20th, 2015, 06:34 PM   #3
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,485

Ya but tech is going to kill all jobs anyway. It's slavery without the expense of room and board. It's projected that 52% of all jobs will be gone in 20 years and not just the low skill stuff (which will actually be the safest as the low pay those jobs command keeps human labor cost effective). An increase in min wage isn't going to speed that up except for point of sale retail positions. Robots aren't quite at the stage of stocking shelves and flipping burgers yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU&list=WL
David is offline  
Old November 21st, 2015, 05:12 AM   #4
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Ya but tech is going to kill all jobs anyway. It's slavery without the expense of room and board. It's projected that 52% of all jobs will be gone in 20 years and not just the low skill stuff (which will actually be the safest as the low pay those jobs command keeps human labor cost effective). An increase in min wage isn't going to speed that up except for point of sale retail positions. Robots aren't quite at the stage of stocking shelves and flipping burgers yet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU&list=WL
David, technology has been a net contributor to USA’s aggregate population’s living standards. We can argue as to how you quantify and compare living standards between nations or between differences of years; certainly the purchasing power of a nation’s median wage’s rate is an indicator of their living standards.

I hope that I misunderstood what you meant when you wrote “(which will actually be the safest as the low pay those jobs command keeps human labor cost effective) “.
Do you believe that the primary purpose and goal of a nation’s economic policies is to increase the wealth and power of the nation's most wealthy and/or most powerful peoples?

I judge a nation’s economy by the quality of their living standards and their ability to sustain and further improve those living standards. Thus I judge their economy by the extent of their median wage rate’s purchasing power and their ability to sustain and further increase their median wage rate.

The purchasing power of our FMW rate is an indicator of the worth we attribute to the labors of our least qualified performance of our least demanding tasks. I consider as our nation’s regard for those that are among the least of us.
But additionally the FMW rate does not equally contribute but it does contribute to ALL employee compensations.

An insufficient FMW rate’ purchasing power is somewhat a drag upon the purchasing powers of ALL employee compensations (including our median wage).

I’m unable to conceive how an insufficient minimum wage rate which is critical to AT LEAST the lowest fifth of our full time employees could not drag down our median wage rate. I’m unable to conceive of a robust economy that lacks a robust segment of middle income earners.
Additionally all USA enterprises and those that own those enterprises all earn increased aggregate incomes when the purchasing powers of are middle income earner s increase.

We all do better when we have greater regard for our low wage employees.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from tecoyah and Aufgeblassen
Supposn is offline  
Old November 21st, 2015, 08:34 AM   #5
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,485

Quote:
Originally Posted by reason10 View Post
Tech has always killed jobs, throughout history. The automobile put buggy whip factories and stagecoach drivers out of work. The computer put a lot of telephone operators out of work. The internet music and video streaming put record stores and video stores out of business. The RedBox pretty much closed up every Blockbuster Video store in the country.

If you want manufacturing jobs back, elect Donald Trump. The jobs will come back and the lower educated types will get decent jobs.
We're the #1 manufacturer in the world and are manufacturing a record number of goods. Those jobs have been automated and will NEVER return no matter the political situation. Detroit failed because it's people didn't become engineers when robots started building the cars. I always shake my head when people complain about manufacturing like it's a political issue.
Thanks from numan
David is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2015, 05:06 PM   #6
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by reason10 View Post
... If you want manufacturing jobs back, elect Donald Trump. The jobs will come back and the lower educated types will get decent jobs.
Reason 10, I’m a proponent of Import Certificates. That’s a unilateral proposal for USA’s global trade of goods. It is a market rather than a government driven policy to significantly reduce if not entirely eliminate USA’s annual global trade deficits of goods.
The policy serves as an effective indirect subsidy of USA exported products. All direct costs due to the policy are entirely passed to USA purchasers of imported goods.
Annual trade deficits are detrimental to their nation’s numbers of jobs and thus to their median wage and their economy.

Refer to Wikipedia’s article entitled “Import Certificates

or to the paragraphs entitled
“Trade balances’ affects upon their nation’s GDP”
within Wikipedia’s article entitled “Balance of trade “.

These topics are also discussed within the threads
Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage (credit, interest, tax) - Economics - Page 5 - City-Data Forum
and
Trade deficits are ALLWAYS economically detrimental to their nation. .

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2015, 09:45 PM   #7
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,485

Quote:
Originally Posted by reason10 View Post
It's hard to use the word Donald Trump (the creator of an EIGHT BILLION DOLLAR COMPANY, with very little debt) in the same sentence with the word buffoon.
He went bankrupt multiple times and is fighting a massive legal battle right now (buried under the political news) with the investors he ripped off in his last failure. At best, he's an average real estate businessman with a cushy nest egg courtesy of his dad and the politicians he owns.

As for his ideas (or lack thereof), the man sounds more like an African presidential candidate than American.
Thanks from numan
David is offline  
Old July 22nd, 2017, 08:29 PM   #8
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
It does BOTH reducing wages and reducing jobs. The very latest Seattle buffoonery of increasing minimum wages proves it!
Aufgeblassen, please expand upon this quoted post referring to Seattle. Why do you believe "It does BOTH reducing wages and reducing jobs"?

Respectfully, Supposn
Supposn is offline  
Old July 23rd, 2017, 06:34 AM   #9
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
With MORE unemployed, the average wage drops.
That does not necessarily correlate and in this case is just plain inaccurate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...=.5850ac3261d7
tecoyah is offline  
Old July 23rd, 2017, 07:13 AM   #10
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
In the Seattle case it indeed does though.
Had you bothered to read and understand the link I provided, you would not have made a fool of yourself with this reply.
tecoyah is offline  
Old July 23rd, 2017, 07:52 AM   #11
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
According to a study by the University of Washington—commissioned by the city of Seattle—their second min. wage hike
(18.2%) caused a reduction in hours worked of 9.5 hours per worker per month, causing a net loss of income for
minimum-wage workers of $125 a month. Thanks a lot, Seattle.

Right here! https://www.commentarymagazine.com/a...-minimum-wage/
If you duck, and dodge a bit more to the right it is just possible you might avoid the inevitable "Gotcha" by a couple inches.
tecoyah is offline  
Old July 23rd, 2017, 08:20 AM   #12
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
YOU ducked, as you avoided 100% commenting on the data I presented.

I generally avoid commenting on data I do not know, and I am not about to "Sign Up" on your link to get it. Likely the "Commentary" however has hand picked the cherries that fit the preconceived position they intend. Preferring instead to go off of full data sets I will stick with the studies I have already studied....I'm weird that way.
Thanks from David
tecoyah is offline  
Old July 23rd, 2017, 09:46 AM   #13
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
According to a study by the University of Washington—commissioned by the city of Seattle—their second min. wage hike
(18.2%) caused a reduction in hours worked of 9.5 hours per worker per month, causing a net loss of income for
minimum-wage workers of $125 a month. Thanks a lot, Seattle.

Right here! https://www.commentarymagazine.com/a...-minimum-wage/
Aufgeblassen, University of Washington’s study regarding Seattle’s increased minimum wage rate does not conclude the short and long-term net consequences of the increase to definitely be net detrimental to Seattle’s economy. Their studies do not reflect condemnation which opponents of minimum wage rates hope for.
[Excerpted from
Minimum Wage Study: Effects of Seattle wage hike modest, may be overshadowed by strong economy | UW News

“Our report indicates that Seattle’s track record after increasing the minimum wage is neither as negative as some had feared nor as positive as some had hoped,” Vigdor said. “While the vibrant local economy is boosting employment and incomes up and down the economic ladder, the positive effects of a higher minimum wage are being at least partly offset by cutbacks in hours.”
The researchers cautioned, however, that their findings are statistical averages that could mask distinctions among different types of workers. The findings address only the short-run impact of Seattle’s wage hike to $11 an hour and don’t reflect the full range of experiences for thousands of individual workers in the Seattle economy”].
////////////////////////////////////////////////////

The effects of differing minimum wage rates between political jurisdictions may be greater due to geographical proximity of the price differing jurisdictions, and/or the time and costs for delivering products to the users, and/or retaining employees, or attracting customers within those political jurisdictions. Enterprises’ product prices within individual industries reflect differing proportions of lesser and/or higher labor rates and their aggregate contributions to individual products’ prices.

The effects of state’s minimum wage rates are effectively reduced due to any lesser extent of our federal minimum rate. If a state can enjoy NET benefit due to a greater state minimum rate, should they deny themselves that NET benefit? There certainly would be lesser numbers of enterprises (than otherwise) located near the borders of lesser wage rate states.
A similar phenomenon (to a state’s minim wage rate), occurs where cities establish their own minimum wage rate.

Respectfully, Supposn

Last edited by Supposn; July 23rd, 2017 at 09:56 AM.
Supposn is offline  
Old July 25th, 2017, 12:48 AM   #14
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by tecoyah View Post
I generally avoid commenting on data I do not know, and I am not about to "Sign Up" on your link to get it. Likely the "Commentary" however has hand picked the cherries that fit the preconceived position they intend. Preferring instead to go off of full data sets I will stick with the studies I have already studied....I'm weird that way.
tecoyah & David, regarding: Minimum Wage Study: Effects of Seattle wage hike modest, may be overshadowed by strong economy | UW News

I did respond to Aufgeblassen’s link.
How else could we mutually discuss a topic if we don’t consider how other participants arrived at their conclussions?

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from arcturus88
Supposn is offline  
Old July 25th, 2017, 08:13 PM   #15
Representative
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Cliffside Park, NJ
Posts: 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
The bottom line is that businesses close and/or move elsewhere to flee business hostile environments. End of story.
Aufgeblassen, true, ”businesses do close and/or move elsewhere to flee business hostile environments”. Enterprises are also attracted to locations with potential more potential customers and/or with more incomes, and/or larger labor pool, and/or they refrain from relocating and risking a net loss of customers simply to avoid the greater minimum wage rate.

The question is, (despite the handicap of our insufficient federal minimum wage rate), does the individual state’s or city’s economy benefit or is it detrimentally effected immediately through long term consequences of their minimum rate’s exceeding the federal rate.
The Washington University study of Seattle does not provide the conclusive determination that opponents of the minimum wage had hoped for.

Respectfully, Supposn
Thanks from tecoyah
Supposn is offline  
Old July 25th, 2017, 11:14 PM   #16
Secretary of State
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Louisville, Ky
Posts: 3,456

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supposn View Post
Aufgeblassen, true, ”businesses do close and/or move elsewhere to flee business hostile environments”. Enterprises are also attracted to locations with potential more potential customers and/or with more incomes, and/or larger labor pool, and/or they refrain from relocating and risking a net loss of customers simply to avoid the greater minimum wage rate.

The question is, (despite the handicap of our insufficient federal minimum wage rate), does the individual state’s or city’s economy benefit or is it detrimentally effected immediately through long term consequences of their minimum rate’s exceeding the federal rate.
The Washington University study of Seattle does not provide the conclusive determination that opponents of the minimum wage had hoped for.

Respectfully, Supposn
Carful now....you might cause an overload of data and burn out the processor.
tecoyah is offline  
Old September 4th, 2017, 01:42 AM   #17
Intern
 
Archie Goodwin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2014
From: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aufgeblassen View Post
According to a study by the University of Washington—commissioned by the city of Seattle—their second min. wage hike
(18.2%) caused a reduction in hours worked of 9.5 hours per worker per month, causing a net loss of income for
minimum-wage workers of $125 a month. Thanks a lot, Seattle.

Right here! https://www.commentarymagazine.com/a...-minimum-wage/
This commentary is unsubstantiated on its face, and an utter falsehood in point of actual fact.

Archie,
Seattle WASHINGTON
Thanks from tecoyah
Archie Goodwin is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Economics

Tags
jobs , minimum , reduce , wage



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should a minimum wage hike happen? andrew320 Economics 21 June 7th, 2013 02:28 AM
Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage Supposn Economics 81 February 13th, 2013 03:26 PM
Minimum wage’s affect upon median wage. Supposn Economics 13 September 10th, 2012 02:49 PM
Reduce Debt - No Paychecks for Congress Editorialist Government and Politics 11 August 24th, 2011 01:16 PM
Minimum wage. Supposn Economics 27 July 1st, 2011 07:30 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.