Tuesday, February 18, 2014
Minimum Wage Increase Would Have Mixed Effects
This article in The New York Times talks about the new proposal to raise
the federal minimum wage to $10.10/hour, which is a significant
increase. Democrats argue that this would help to alleviate poverty,
while Republicans argue that it would kill jobs (and is bad for
business). Economists aren't exactly sure what would come of the bill
most Americans support, and the article leads us to believe that most
economists think Republicans are overestimating the effect it would have
on jobs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think the hypocrisy of the Republicans on this issue is insane. Republicans don't want to raise minimum wage and they don't want people on welfare or government assistance, the thing is they can't have both. The average fast food employee is about 30, which means they have a family they need to support. But these low paying jobs are the only ones available, not because their lazy, obviously they would rather be working a nine-to-five salary job than these jobs, but the fact is these are the only jobs they can get. But since they pay so low they need government assistance in order for their family to survive, not thrive, survive. Wouldn't it make more sense for these multi-billion dollar corporations to spare the money for an increased minimum wage than for the government and tax payers to be burdened with supporting these families?
ReplyDeleteThere is no way that a federal minimum wage hike is a good idea. Not only would it cost 500,000 people their jobs and redistribute the wealth those poor people would have made to other poor people, but it also violates the importance of the dual-federalism doctrine. There is no reason that the minimum wage (regardless of what one feels about the merits or demerits) should be a federal issue—if the states want to raise their minimum wage, that’s fine. This is just another example of the federal government attempting to impose its will on the states.
ReplyDeleteObviously the country doesn't need any more unemployment to worry about, but I feel like raising the minimum wage has a possible beneficial effect that can't be ignored. The fact that the unemployment could range from nothing to about a million fewer jobs is definitely worrisome, however. I definitely agree with Anna about the hypocrisy on this particular issue, because Republicans want nothing to happen and for things to stay as they are when this hike could benefit everyone, especially those living below the poverty line.
ReplyDeleteI really struggle with the idea of a $10.10 an hour minimum wage. I understand that some families would really benefit from this, but I just don't feel like a lot of menial labor jobs deserve a wage this high. I am incredibly conflicted about this issue. But in general I think that the focus of the government should be more on education, so that people supporting families are not the same as those working minimum wage jobs. If it were high school students working minimum wage jobs there would be no need for a minimum wage increase. Education should be the factor to move families above the poverty line, not a minimum wage increase.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious that something needs to be done to help lift more families in America above the poverty line. Republicans are opposed to a minimum wage hike, but they don't seem to be proposing any other solutions. The job losses that would occur should not be ignored, but neither can the benefits that would come from an increase in minimum wage. While teenagers may not need an increase, many adults who are trying to support a family do.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Michaela in that I too am conflicted on this issue. On the one hand, I have a part-job as a dishwasher and could be directly affected by a minimum wage hike. Not only that, but families across the nation could rise out of poverty. On the other hand, this hike could destroy jobs, businesses, and cause inflation to rise as well. I think the bottom line here is that I need to see more research done before I can determine which side of the argument I agree with.
ReplyDeleteI think this article shows the influence of bureaucracy on politicians. It wasn't until economist came out with numbers regarding the wage increase that an argument was fueled. Both democrats and republicans are at the mercy of experts who could easily manipulate both sides with their conclusions. I think that the importance of the issue and the republican controlled house will prevent the wage increase from succeeding, so as intense as this debate may be, it will be short lived.
ReplyDeleteBy raising minimum wage to $10.10, it can raise nearly one million people out of poverty. But it could lead to the loss of 500,000 jobs. I think that keeping and creating jobs is much more important than raising the minimum wage. Unemployment can either be short-term or long-term; but no matter how long it lasts, it affects everyone. I think that everyone would be willing to compromise on this issue if a second part was added that would make up for the lost jobs. Because of the compromise, not everyone will be happy but it would be a step in the right direction.
ReplyDeleteI feel like I just read something on a very similar topic just a few minutes ago, and it still seems like everyone is divided on this issue. But I still think that a smaller increase is probably the best idea. Sure, it may cost a few people their jobs (in the grand scheme of things, 100,000 people is a lot, but it's really not a huge chunk of the population), but it won't cost at least half a million people their jobs, while lifting only a few people out of poverty. I do think that getting people above the poverty line is a good thing; however, it is also a good thing to make sure people are employed and have paying jobs, so I believe that a smaller increase is probably the best idea because it gives us a little bit of the best of both worlds.
ReplyDeleteObviously, it's tough a pick a position for this issue. I won't bother listing the potential benefits and drawbacks. After reading the article, I was even more conflicted. So I just went through what everyone else said to see if I could find one of you to side with. Michaela, I think you have the most persuasive argument with your idea of focusing on education. $10.10 per hour seems like a dramatic jump, and I think we would see better results by looking towards education.
ReplyDeleteI brought this up in another blog regarding wage increases but would like to say it again. I have no strong feeling either way, but if the minimum wage increases some people will benefit and others will not. Some may be laid off and some will be required to do more work for the increase in pay. Being a minimum wage earning employee, I like money, but I also realize many people will not keep their jobs.
ReplyDeleteThis minimum wage increase would most likely have a great effect on stimulating lower class income, allowing for easier living for many who can barley afford the simplest of comforts. It may lead to a decrease of available jobs that usually pay minimum wage, but it can help with many other aspects of how Americans live in certain parts of the country. To some minimum wage earners this is blessing because they work hard to only earn very little in return, while people of our age group reap even more benefits than those who work to feed their families. Although this means that many will lose their jobs, it will open up more opportunities for many more Americans.
ReplyDeleteI could not agree more with Annamarie that Republicans need to do what makes the government productive: compromise. Yes, this idea is extremely controversial and we could witness major changes in our economy, but we have to remember how many adults and lower-income Americans are affected by this and how well they could benefit. Instead of receiving help from the government a $10.10 minimum wage could help so many poor families with basic needs. Like any bill or law, some people will benefit and others will not. I just believe that the people who would benefit from the minimum wage increase are the ones who truly need it the most.
ReplyDeleteThis feels like deja vu. I think Kevin brings up a good point; baby steps might be necessary. I think that every cent matters when it comes to families living off of minimum wage, so if it takes a smaller increase to make it happen, then so be it. Lydia also makes a good point - while a wage increase might hurt some, it will ultimately benefit those who need it the most. I feel like a lot of times people are only looking out for themselves and are unable to open their eyes to the less fortunate around them and the benefits they would receive from an increase in the minimum wage.
ReplyDeleteOverall, even though many people would be negatively affected by a minimum wage increase, I feel like more people will benefit from it. Kevin brings up a good point of taking baby steps, I think that this would be the best way of handling this situation. Also, I think people need to look at the positive effect that it would have on the people who need it most.
ReplyDeleteThis process should be carried out slowly, to better measure the effects. Obviously, as many people have already said, there will be those who do benefit and those who don't. I agree with Michaela, education is essential, but we do need some other plan to counteract poverty. Education won't affect everyone who it needs to, and it's a lengthy process.
ReplyDeleteTo a degree, I agree with what Andrew is saying. I don't think that the federal government should just be able to tell all of the states to raise their minimum wages. Instead, I think this should be a slow and gradual process, with some states raising their minimum wages a little at a time. Then we could actually see how many jobs are cut and the effect that the increase has on the lives of lower income families.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the democrats but they really should be careful and take their time with raising the minimum wage. If they raise it too high too quickly then it could hurt employment drastically. Businesses might be too afraid to hire workers knowing that they have to pay them more. They're also taking a risk because no one seems to be able to agree on the amount of jobs that'll be lost. There is a huge difference between losing 0 jobs to losing a million. In the end I think they should go through with this, but they must sort through every single detail to make it the most effective.
ReplyDelete