Boost Minimum wage

An interesting take of raising the minimum wage. Study after study shows it is a positive thing to do, so why do cons hate the American worker so bad, they would deny them a decent wage?


-they found that minimum wage increases do not reduce teen employment levels.
-no adverse effect on employment
-no detectable employment losses from the kind of minimum wage increases we have seen in the United States.
-even during hard economic times, raising the minimum wage doesn’t reduce employment.

Why is this the case? Studies generally find that policies that increase the compensation of low-wage workers significantly reduce turnover, boost worker effort, encourage employers to invest in training for their workers, and can increase demand for goods and services—all of which help balance out any potential negative effects.

Increasing the minimum wage helps ensure employees are rewarded for their hard work and boosts the incomes of low-wage workers—something that is sorely needed to increase consumption and get the economy going. It reduces turnover and helps employers compete on a more level playing field, forcing firms away from a low-road, low-human capital investment model to one where workers stay attached to the workforce and employers make stronger investments in training. Taxpayers are better off because they have to bear fewer of the negative externalities from low-road employers—such as the costs of food stamps and Medicaid.

There is also a growing consensus among economists and academics that raising the minimum wage does not kill jobs even during periods of recession.

We reviewed academic research that examines the effects of minimum wage increases during a recession or stretch of time with high unemployment and found significant evidence that even during hard economic times, raising the minimum wage is likely to have no adverse effect on employment.
http://www.americanprogressaction.o...m-wage-is-good-policy-even-during-hard-times/


These caveats notwithstanding, our results explain the sometimes conflicting results in the existing minimum wage literature. For the range of minimum wage increases over the past several decades, methodologies using local com- parisons provide more reliable estimates by controlling for heterogeneity in employment growth. These estimates sug- gest no detectable employment losses from the kind of min- imum wage increases we have seen in the United States. Our analysis highlights the importance of accounting for such heterogeneity in future work on this topic.
http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/workingpapers/157-07.pdf

 

Granny says, "Dat's right, it's a hard-knock life - thanks to Obama...

Wages Fail to Keep Up with Rising Housing Costs: Consumers Can't Afford to Own -- or Rent
Nov 7, 2014 — Americans are getting squeezed. For some, homeownership is simply not affordable, or it's plain impractical due to the need for career mobility. Some can't come up with enough money for a down payment, or just don't want to be burdened with the maintenance and expense of a home. As a result, first-time homeownership is at its lowest level since 1987, according to research by the National Association of Realtors (NAR). Even young adults who would like to move into their first home are finding it difficult to buy.

 

Nice spin in that article, can't believe people still fall for that.

Let's break it down shall we?

they found that minimum wage increases do not reduce teen employment levels.

Here you will notice how they limit their response to only "teens" because adding in the rest of the demographics would show their study to indicate something else. It is classic cherry picking information to support an argument.

-no detectable employment losses from the kind of minimum wage increases we have seen in the United States.

This one is filled with spin and is representative of this entire article. First of all, "no detectable" is a key word that allows them to say whatever they want while still not telling a lie. Something is detectable or not depending on what type of method of discovery your using so what they are telling us is that how the disseminated this information ultimately showed nothing detectable although someone else using a different method mind find an opposite result.

"This kind of minimum wage increase"

Another example of them using information to apply to their argument while trying to cover their rears. They are trying to argue a general minimum wage increase has no negative affects but to not get tore apart by their academic critics they must add in phrases like this one. When they get critiqued they will point to this to prevent their study from being debunked. However, common sense tells you this is just silly. You either raise the minimum wage or you do not, there are not different types.

These caveats notwithstanding

Basically, ignore all the other information to the contrary and just believe us.

These estimates sug- gest

Anyone who uses academic research to source knows right away that keywords like "suggest" or "indicate" or "elude" mean that the authors are guessing. Those are all fancy words for we don't know but think we are right so what do you think?

In conclusion, these studies highlight certain information that pertains to their argument and ignore the rest. They suggest their information proves something yet constantly word their statements to prevent giving a straight answer. They leave themselves plenty of coverage for rebuttal. Anyone using this as a source for anything, other than an opinion, is making a serious error and looks foolish.

 

Plus, whenever minimum wage rises, prices rise in order to compensate for the loss.

That's why I say no.

There are some things you can do, sucha s get rid of the middle men and the other meddlers who have to hurt things for the people.

 

Increase welfare or social services, but not minimum wage. Some peoples work is not worth the minimum wage.

 

And the reason the housing prices are high, is because of:
1. stupid regulations the make it more expensive for the landlords.
2. section 8 housing, which is a guaranteed check for the landlords.

This results in more people living on the streets. Nice going, socialists. You really know how to screw things up.
Democrats so love the poor, they create millions more.