Whether you like it or not- whether you agree with it or not, wages are subject to market forces, namely supply and demand. When you mandate a wage that’s higher than market value, you create an imbalance in the market that the market will correct. In this case it means that people are going to lose their jobs. When you increase the cost of wages, you increase both: the quality of labor that employers have to choose from, and the quality of labor they demand; this means that the lowest-skilled, least-educated workers (the very workers you’re claiming to want to help), are going to get priced out of the market.
If you want wages for low skill jobs to go up, then you need to reduce the surplus of workers we have in this country, and that’s all there is to it. The real unemployment rate is still over 10%, and the labor force participation rate is at its lowest point in nearly 40 years; to put it plainly it’s a buyer’s market for labor right now.
I love how no one ever complains about market forces when they work in their favor, well this is the other side of the equation, and you have to take the good with the bad.
I'm skeptical. Increasing wages isn't going to change at all the skill levels available in the labor pool that companies can draw from. Prices will increase to offset the increased cost of labor, but consumer spending will also increase which will more than offset the escalation in prices. It's been shown that higher wages for low income workers increases spending which feeds back into economic growth. I also happen to live in an area where the minimum wage was raised to double the national average and the local economy is one of the strongest in the nation.
Increasing wages isn't going to change at all the skill levels available in the labor pool that companies can draw from.
It does actually. It increases the number of people who are willing to work these jobs, meaning that employers will have their choice of a much wider field of applicants, a field that will include higher-qualified, higher-skilled workers; workers who weren't willing to do these jobs for $7.25 hr, will be willing to do them for $15 an hour.
Prices will increase to offset the increased cost of labor, but consumer spending will also increase which will more than offset the escalation in prices.
No, it really won't.
You're talking about over $16,000 in additional revenue, per minimum wage employee, that a business would have to generate in order to simply maintain their current level of profitability. That's to say nothing of all the supervisors and assistant managers, making $10 - $15 an hour that are now going to have to be bumped up.
From where did people ever get this notion that businesses can simply generate additional revenue on demand, markets be damned?
It's been shown that higher wages for low income workers increases spending which feeds back into economic growth.
No it hasn't. Not ever. That's an economic fallacy that was disproven over 160 years ago by Frédéric Bastiat. Raising wages does not create economic growth, it redistributes wealth. The only thing that creates economic growth is production.
Whether you like it or not- whether you agree with it or not, wages are subject to market forces, namely supply and demand. When you mandate a wage that’s higher than market value, you create an imbalance in the market that the market will correct. In this case it means that people are going to lose their jobs. When you increase the cost of wages, you increase both: the quality of labor that employers have to choose from, and the quality of labor they demand; this means that the lowest-skilled, least-educated workers (the very workers you’re claiming to want to help), are going to get priced out of the market.
If you want wages for low skill jobs to go up, then you need to reduce the surplus of workers we have in this country, and that’s all there is to it. The real unemployment rate is still over 10%, and the labor force participation rate is at its lowest point in nearly 40 years; to put it plainly it’s a buyer’s market for labor right now.
I love how no one ever complains about market forces when they work in their favor, well this is the other side of the equation, and you have to take the good with the bad.
I'm skeptical. Increasing wages isn't going to change at all the skill levels available in the labor pool that companies can draw from. Prices will increase to offset the increased cost of labor, but consumer spending will also increase which will more than offset the escalation in prices. It's been shown that higher wages for low income workers increases spending which feeds back into economic growth. I also happen to live in an area where the minimum wage was raised to double the national average and the local economy is one of the strongest in the nation.
I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong on this one.
It does actually. It increases the number of people who are willing to work these jobs, meaning that employers will have their choice of a much wider field of applicants, a field that will include higher-qualified, higher-skilled workers; workers who weren't willing to do these jobs for $7.25 hr, will be willing to do them for $15 an hour.
No, it really won't.
You're talking about over $16,000 in additional revenue, per minimum wage employee, that a business would have to generate in order to simply maintain their current level of profitability. That's to say nothing of all the supervisors and assistant managers, making $10 - $15 an hour that are now going to have to be bumped up.
From where did people ever get this notion that businesses can simply generate additional revenue on demand, markets be damned?
No it hasn't. Not ever. That's an economic fallacy that was disproven over 160 years ago by Frédéric Bastiat. Raising wages does not create economic growth, it redistributes wealth. The only thing that creates economic growth is production.