I completely disagree with the article's conclusion. But, this is a pretty good article. It actually cites opposing views, including linking to them, and tries

I completely disagree with the article's conclusion. But, this is a pretty good article. It actually cites opposing views, including linking to them, and tries to make its case logically. Great writing! That said, I'm not an economist, but when I see an issue such as this, in which leading economists disagree with some position, I don't think the takeaway of one article should be "I now know what the truth is". I mean as the article itself says, lots of leading economists think a minimum wage is bad. So if after reading the article your position is "well clearly I now know better than people who have spent their whole lives on this topic", you're being arrogant. Also, from the economists I do hear on a regular basis, it's pretty clear that they're all very anti-minimum-wage. Obviously this is a self-selected sample, but I get the feeling that most economists aren't particularly pro minimum wage - they're either indifferent or at most think that there are some tradeoffs that can be made in favor of the minimum wage. But there are tradeoffs, as in the econ 101 model isn't wrong. It's just worth it sometimes. On the "empirical" question, I tend to side with Bryan Caplan here - there are studies going both ways, but since in almost every other situation basic supply/demand models are correct, there's got to be really strong evidence against assuming supply/demand models work for labor, too.