Clemens and Wither used data from the Census Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation to estimate the degree to which the minimum wage bumps affected "targeted" workers — those most likely to be affected by these bumps. They were able to take advantage of the fact that many states set their minimum wage higher than the federal minimum, so when a federal minimum wage hike takes effect the actual impact varies state by state. By comparing outcomes in states with large minimum wage hikes to those with small ones, they calculated how much the higher minimum wage affected the labor market.
The authors determined the minimum wage increases lowered the employment-population ratio (the share of working-age adults who were employed) by 0.7 percentage points from 2006 to 2012. During that time, the ratio fell by almost 5 percentage points, from 63.4 percent in December 2006 to 58.6 in December 2012. So while that decline may look like it was all recession, in reality it was around 15 percent due to the minimum wage, according to this paper. As of December 2012, when the working-age population was around 201 million, those 0.7 percentage points would have equaled around 1.4 million fewer people working.
Seems common sense to me, but i'm sure we'll still have people arguing that the CBO and this study are just wrong and it's all "win" for MW workers.
Study: The 2007 minimum wage hike cost more than 1 million jobs during the recession
And here I thought a market crash cost all those jobs...
Why bother with history when one can simply revision it?
And here I thought a market crash cost all those jobs...
So while that decline may look like it was all recession, in reality it was around 15 percent due to the minimum wage, according to this paper. As of December 2012, when the working-age population was around 201 million, those 0.7 percentage points would have equaled around 1.4 million fewer people working.
Of-course.
And to think this is all the Progressives have been able to muster up when it comes to offering up solutions to our economic issues.
Well I gake that back. Tax Increases, and '' stimulus to increase aggregate demand ".
All destructive platitudes that wind up hurting the Middle class
Ideally, those who actually care about the working poor.Who cares about losing ****ty jobs like that? You guys don't care that millions of those low-paying, ****ty jobs have been added under Obama, but you care that a million was lost by raising the minimum a bit?
Um, that increase in the minimum wage came during the Bush administration. So you think Bush is a progressive? :mrgreen:
Yeah, perhaps if we didn't suffer from one of the worst financial crises in our history coupled with the uncertainty of not knowing if Obama was gonna play ball during the same time of this study, this might still be considered BS...
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics.
Companies didn't hire them workers because they A. Didn't need them or B. Put the additional burden on existing employees. LIKE THEY ALWAYS DO.
Blow smoke up someone else's ass and tell'em their back's on fire...
If you think about it, it would actually create jobs. There is really no question about that.Maybe we should do away with minimum wage I'm sure that will create jobs.
Ideally, those who actually care about the working poor.
If you cared about the working poor, you would want less of those jobs. Working those jobs is an accurate description of what Hell must be like.
Much better to be unemployed I'm sure.
Much better to be unemployed I'm sure.
Likely. I don't buy this study. But I'd like to see more on it. Overall, people making more means they spend more. If they spend more, everyone benefits. Making our workers third world workers won't help the economy. As I understand it, accounting for inflation, we make less today and not more. The trouble with our economy may well be more related to not paying enough.
They make more causing higher prices to cover the increased labor costs. The poor are in the same (relative) spot they were in (after a little time has passed) ... and the middle class, whose dollars will now purchase less, are in a worse spot.
If you think about it, it would actually create jobs. There is really no question about that.
They make more causing higher prices to cover the increased labor costs. The poor are in the same (relative) spot they were in (after a little time has passed) ... and the middle class, whose dollars will now purchase less, are in a worse spot.
Except no one is advocating that. You really should be able to tell the difference between voluntary employment and slavery at this point.As would allowing slavery.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?