4 ms·

Here, let me Google it for you: http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2015/december/effects-of-minimum-wage-on-employment/ http:/

Here, let me Google it for you: http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2015/december/effects-of-minimum-wage-on-employment/ http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic... I'm glad you "guess" it's nearly 100%. This article (the top Google hit for "effects of minimum wage on employment") suggests it's in the realm of 10% (though it's probably smaller) based on simple linear models of price elasticity. A 10% drop in employment is not nothing! It could absolutely matter! But that's the foundation for a debate, not some made- up numbers. My main point is that it's foolish to 'guess' and start applying numbers... it's tempting to make a point that's grounded in political philosophy, and slap a coat of speculative, pseudo-quantitative paint on it so it sounds more considered. To your other point, about not wasting time on internet comments, I will respectfully concede.

tudorconstantin 9y ago
And what's the income reduction (in %) for those unlucky 10 percenters who end up jobless?
- mrow84 9y ago
  As we're all comfortable with numbers plucked out of the ether, let's use yours: 1. The group of low-wage workers produce on average $9/hr. 2. A minimum wage of $15/hr is introduced. 3. The income of 10% of the group falls to $0/hr because they lose their jobs, a fall of $9/hr * 0.1 = $0.9/hr on average. 4. The income of 90% of the group rises to the new minimum wage of $15/hr, an increase of $(15 - 9 = 6)/hr * 0.9 = $5.4/hr on average. 5. The net change in income is $(5.4 - 0.9 = 4.5)/hr on average. So with all these contrived numbers the introduction of the minimum wage raised low-wage worker pay by $4.5/hr on average. Is that bad for low-wage workers? Of course, really, we should just take ryandamm's advice here [0] and stop trying to provide our arguments with the air of rigour by throwing some made up numbers around. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14381189 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14381189

tudorconstantin 9y ago

And what's the income reduction (in %) for those unlucky 10 percenters who end up jobless?

mrow84 9y ago
As we're all comfortable with numbers plucked out of the ether, let's use yours: 1. The group of low-wage workers produce on average $9/hr. 2. A minimum wage of $15/hr is introduced. 3. The income of 10% of the group falls to $0/hr because they lose their jobs, a fall of $9/hr * 0.1 = $0.9/hr on average. 4. The income of 90% of the group rises to the new minimum wage of $15/hr, an increase of $(15 - 9 = 6)/hr * 0.9 = $5.4/hr on average. 5. The net change in income is $(5.4 - 0.9 = 4.5)/hr on average. So with all these contrived numbers the introduction of the minimum wage raised low-wage worker pay by $4.5/hr on average. Is that bad for low-wage workers? Of course, really, we should just take ryandamm's advice here [0] and stop trying to provide our arguments with the air of rigour by throwing some made up numbers around. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14381189 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14381189