tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10883291.post115098869530146240..comments2023-10-15T05:53:37.221-07:00Comments on St George Blog: Does the Minimum Wage Really Cost Folks Jobs?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10883291.post-1151181913941076912006-06-24T13:45:00.000-07:002006-06-24T13:45:00.000-07:00Last I heard, the corp was not the major employer ...Last I heard, the corp was not the major employer in the uS. It was the independent small businessman and I'm sure they respond differently to min. wage increases than USA, Inc.<BR/><BR/>I met a Dutch woman recently who was all for min. wage. I then queried her about her own business she left in Holland and asked what happened when the min. wage was increased. She said it eventually shut down due to higher costs yet she was unwilling to give up the idea of valuing these decrees from The Godhead. Obviously the min. wage was a contributor, whether or not the main cause.<BR/><BR/>Earthmonkey is a strange animal.jomamahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11059960615448444452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10883291.post-1151002476631330142006-06-22T11:54:00.000-07:002006-06-22T11:54:00.000-07:00As Kevin Carson said, and what I assume you will a...As Kevin Carson said, and what I assume you will agree to be true:<BR/><BR/>"When the theory predicts that in a free market wages will be determined by the productivity of labor, and we see that they aren't, what's the obvious conclusion? That we're dealing with power relations, not market relations."<BR/><BR/>The main reason to then oppose minimum wage laws is because they are ineffective interventions which do more harm then good.<BR/><BR/>We could do a ton better for the working class to eliminate the laws and regulations that distort the labor market, instead of going down the harmful and destructive path of ineffectual MW laws.iceberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00092220167956120749noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10883291.post-1150996347550458102006-06-22T10:12:00.000-07:002006-06-22T10:12:00.000-07:00Thanks, David, for the thoughtful comment. I don'...Thanks, David, for the thoughtful comment. I don't dismiss the idea that minimum wage increases will cost jobs; I'd just like to see the point made while acknowledging the unique aspects of the labor market. An emotional argument, or at least one that takes emotional aspects into account, would help win the hearts and minds of working class people. The bald economic argument won't fly. It doesn't even fly with me entirely. <BR/><BR/>I have scruples about coercing employers to pay more, but I wouldn't abolish the minimum wage until I had eliminated government action that suppresses wages.Vache Follehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14942494955243643381noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10883291.post-1150992704130449282006-06-22T09:11:00.000-07:002006-06-22T09:11:00.000-07:00I like the essay by B.K. Marcus, The 3 E's of the ...I like the essay by B.K. Marcus, <A HREF="http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2004/tle283-20040808-04.html" REL="nofollow">The 3 E's of the Minimum Wage</A>. But, of course, he uses the economic argument that a higher minimum wage will mean employers will simply reduce the amount of minimum wage jobs available accordingly -- an idea you dismiss. As Marcus points out, the <EM>emotional</EM> argument is the toughest to overcome, and you seek an emotional argument against the minimum wage.<BR/><BR/>I do not have any statistical data to back up my stance on this, but I do have personal experience. Both of my parents worked all their lives in a non-union factory that manufactures clothing (the type of clothing has changed occasionally over the years). The factory employed close to 300 people at one time, and most of those people were paid a base salary of minimum wage with the ability to earn extra based on production. <BR/><BR/>When the minimum wage was increased, people there were immediately laid off. The factory usually employed surplus people that did not meet the standards required to make extra money through production. This is how people would be "trained" to do the job. They were hired at minimum wage and allowed to work on the production line under close supervision (more or less with a verbal whip at their backs) until they could reach expected output. These people relied exclusively on their minimum wage hourly pay. When the government mandated an increase in the minimum wage, the guy that owned the factory would simply look at the production numbers and order the elimination of the lowest producers in order to keep the base payroll static. The owner would then order the floor supervisors to push the remaining employees to increase their production to make up for whatever was lost through the layoffs. <BR/><BR/>It is difficult to say whether those jobs were permanently lost or not, because the output of the factory always fluctuated with the demands of the market. If orders picked up, some of those people previously laid off might be hired again. (It always seemed to me there was a constant revolving door of the same people coming and going there.) If demand dropped, people would be laid off. <BR/><BR/>The key point to me is what Marcus calls the ethical problem of state coercion that the minimum wage law introduces. Even if the labor market is not free, I cannot warm up to the notion of the state forcing people to do something.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com