Sidebar

[classhandicapper]

mostpost,

I agree with you to some extent.

Raising the minimum wage DOES transfer "some" income into the hands of "some" workers which gives them more purchasing power that they can then spend on products and services.

The problem is that's not 1 for 1 to the impacted companies.

If your theory was correct, we could simply make the minimum wage $100 an hour and eliminate poverty for everyone forever. Even you would probably admit that won't work.

Ask yourself why.

It might work something like this.

You raise the minimum wage. It costs some SPECIFIC companies that hire minimum wage workers 10K off their bottom line. It costs others nothing. That 10k gets spent back, but it's spent throughout the economy. It helps many companies a little bit. It doesn't help the impacted companies 10k worth. A little bit of extra profit to a lot of companies doesn't lead to as much hiring as a 10k loss to some specific companies. The former make a few extra dollars on a narrow margin. The latter have to close shop. So the net is that some jobs and some of that income evaporates.

Some minimum wage workers are better off.

Some companies are very slightly better off.

Some minimum wage companies and workers are totally screwed.

The net is a negative because some income and jobs evaporate.

It's a highly complex subject. It's very difficult to control for all the variables in employment so you can isolate just the impact of minimum wage and prove it. That's why people are frowning upon your data. But if you look at what real businesses do in response, you'll see the flaw in your thinking.