4 ms·

Does anyone have access to the paper? Raising the minimum wage means less jobs will be available, as employers cut costs and perform layoffs. My assumption is t

Does anyone have access to the paper? Raising the minimum wage means less jobs will be available, as employers cut costs and perform layoffs. My assumption is the paper neglects to factors this into their analysis, but if they do, I'd love to read it. edit: paper shared below!

antoineMoPa 7y ago
Do you have links to articles to backup your assumption?
- degenerate 7y ago
  No I don't.
tempsy 7y ago
please read any study on cities that have substantially raised min wage in recent years (like Seattle) and understand how wrong you are about there being "fewer jobs" as a result before making such ridiculous statements
- theredbox 7y ago
  Can you point me to a study other than the one in Seattle? I have only read about Seattle but have not really researched it thoroughly.
- inanutshellus 7y ago
  Seattle's raising of the minimum wage was arguably symbolic. Seattle--a world-class tech nexus point--raising its minimum wage affected a relatively small percent of businesses compared to a "normal" city, as businesses in Seattle would have long since needed to offer higher wages in order to keep employees. I'd be much more interested in seeing the effects of a $15 wage in Nowheresville, USA than in Seattle.
  - wyre 7y ago
    Symbolic for maybe people that are making above minimum wage but an increase in minimum wage to $15 made so many people lives easier.
    - inanutshellus 7y ago
      Well, that's both the point and missing the point. Seattle's higher minimum wage represented an already-existing reality in Seattle: their top-heavy economy. "Normal" towns' leaders would recognize it as virtue-signaling rather than transformative change, because it would've affected proportionally few people.
- kangnkodos 7y ago
  The Seattle study was done during a time period when the economy of the city was going up significantly. The authors write in the paper that it's possible that if the minimum wage was not raised, it could have resulted in even more people employed.
whiddershins 7y ago
That’s probably accurate, but hotly debated. I would be very cautious about stating it as fact, since there are many competing models and studies about the effects of raising minimum wage, and the one thing that is clear is that no one knows for sure.
paulgb 7y ago
This is the paper: https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/early/2020/01/03/jech-2019-212981.full.pdf https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/early/2020/01/03/jech-2019...
- downerending 7y ago
  Thanks. It's worth noting that they're studying people 18-64 with high school or less education. If this result stands up, it'd be very interesting to drill in and figure out what's really happening. Quite challenging, though--apparently long study hasn't even settled the question of how minimum wage affects the job market. In this case, one could imagine all sorts of confounders. For example, maybe communities that have higher minimum wages simply have them because they're wealthier as a whole, which could in turn lead to lower suicide rates. Or perhaps a higher minimum wage leads to the most marginal workers losing their jobs, and it turns out that they're happier for it somehow.
keeganjw 7y ago
The well-being of people in countries with high minimum wages and strong social safety nets, compared to the US, says otherwise.
anigbrowl 7y ago
You know, a lot of basic economic models rely on underlying assumptions like conditions of perfect competition or zero transaction costs which people tend to forget about when trying to apply those models to the real world. If you a see a piece of research that seems to contradict some elementary principle of economics, it's possible that the researchers somehow forgot all about it or never learned it and that the paper somehow passed out of peer review without anyone pointing out its glaring deficiencies, but it's more likely that that an elementary understanding of economics is insufficient to explain real world phenomena. You can see a parallel to this in the climate science debate, where people object to scientific assertions on the grounds that the sun is very much hotter than burning fossil fuels or 'climate is always changing' and human activity is too nebulous to possibly have an impact. Often deliberately simplistic arguments are used to mislead the slightly-educated and discourage them from becoming better informed.

antoineMoPa 7y ago

Do you have links to articles to backup your assumption?

degenerate 7y ago
No I don't.

tempsy 7y ago

please read any study on cities that have substantially raised min wage in recent years (like Seattle) and understand how wrong you are about there being "fewer jobs" as a result before making such ridiculous statements

theredbox 7y ago
Can you point me to a study other than the one in Seattle? I have only read about Seattle but have not really researched it thoroughly.
inanutshellus 7y ago
Seattle's raising of the minimum wage was arguably symbolic. Seattle--a world-class tech nexus point--raising its minimum wage affected a relatively small percent of businesses compared to a "normal" city, as businesses in Seattle would have long since needed to offer higher wages in order to keep employees. I'd be much more interested in seeing the effects of a $15 wage in Nowheresville, USA than in Seattle.
- wyre 7y ago
  Symbolic for maybe people that are making above minimum wage but an increase in minimum wage to $15 made so many people lives easier.
  - inanutshellus 7y ago
    Well, that's both the point and missing the point. Seattle's higher minimum wage represented an already-existing reality in Seattle: their top-heavy economy. "Normal" towns' leaders would recognize it as virtue-signaling rather than transformative change, because it would've affected proportionally few people.
kangnkodos 7y ago
The Seattle study was done during a time period when the economy of the city was going up significantly. The authors write in the paper that it's possible that if the minimum wage was not raised, it could have resulted in even more people employed.

whiddershins 7y ago

That’s probably accurate, but hotly debated. I would be very cautious about stating it as fact, since there are many competing models and studies about the effects of raising minimum wage, and the one thing that is clear is that no one knows for sure.

paulgb 7y ago

This is the paper: https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/early/2020/01/03/jech-2019-212981.full.pdf https://jech.bmj.com/content/jech/early/2020/01/03/jech-2019...

downerending 7y ago
Thanks. It's worth noting that they're studying people 18-64 with high school or less education. If this result stands up, it'd be very interesting to drill in and figure out what's really happening. Quite challenging, though--apparently long study hasn't even settled the question of how minimum wage affects the job market. In this case, one could imagine all sorts of confounders. For example, maybe communities that have higher minimum wages simply have them because they're wealthier as a whole, which could in turn lead to lower suicide rates. Or perhaps a higher minimum wage leads to the most marginal workers losing their jobs, and it turns out that they're happier for it somehow.

keeganjw 7y ago

The well-being of people in countries with high minimum wages and strong social safety nets, compared to the US, says otherwise.

anigbrowl 7y ago

You know, a lot of basic economic models rely on underlying assumptions like conditions of perfect competition or zero transaction costs which people tend to forget about when trying to apply those models to the real world. If you a see a piece of research that seems to contradict some elementary principle of economics, it's possible that the researchers somehow forgot all about it or never learned it and that the paper somehow passed out of peer review without anyone pointing out its glaring deficiencies, but it's more likely that that an elementary understanding of economics is insufficient to explain real world phenomena. You can see a parallel to this in the climate science debate, where people object to scientific assertions on the grounds that the sun is very much hotter than burning fossil fuels or 'climate is always changing' and human activity is too nebulous to possibly have an impact. Often deliberately simplistic arguments are used to mislead the slightly-educated and discourage them from becoming better informed.