Untrue.

- Many workers would experience an increase in wages; not just workers currently earning minimum wage and not just workers earning under $15.

This is because if workers holding more difficult/less pleasant jobs have the option to instead work a better/easier job for the same income then it is natural to expect some number of them will do so. That displacement of workers from worse jobs to better jobs that have the same pay rate will press employers to increase the wage that they offer for the worsejobs.

- I am NOT ignoring individuals losing their jobs. I personally expect that there will be fewer jobs in total due to the expanded use of automation in any instance where the use of automation is financially advantageous. Therefore I believe that an increase in wages will be net beneficial as it will increase the share of wealth that is allocated to the labor that is remaining.

Also see the CBO report that I linked above.I believe that the good outweighs the bad and that you are operating as if "all things are equal" when that just isn't so.

The market is distorted by government via a minimum wage and social safety nets paid for by taxpayers. It isn't the government's role to maximize profits. The government is supposed to safeguard the greater public good. We can argue about how they screw that up, but they aren't supposed to be in the "increasing profits for capital" business.

The market is distorted by capital, mostly through price fixing via cartels and monopolies. The government is supposed to prevent this and there are laws in place to do so, but the laws are not being enforced. Instead government has been corrupted and the legal system is being used to prevent competition instead of to insure competition.

Labor is weak and nearly crippled. Yes, unions can be corrupt, just like every other human institution.

For some reason you believe that capital having all of the power is good, but government or labor having power is bad.

And I believe that humanity is about more than economics, markets, and profits.

If many workers see an increase in wages, beyond those who make minimum wage, what would that do to cost of living?

If many workers see an increase in wages, beyond those who make minimum wage then employers would employ fewer people, if fewer people are in the work force, what would that do to overall production?

You will have a higher cost of living for everyone(including those who get thrown out of the work force), you would have fewer people working and you would have a decrease in overall production which would further increase cost of living. Your new minimum wage will be insignificant. The people who no longer have a job but do have higher costs will then start robbing people.



Do you know what the biggest predictor of sustained inflation is?

It's not temporary stimulus.

It's wages.

Increasing minimum wage to that high is just a virtue signal. In time, all of those jobs will be completely automated or even self-serve to a point.

This is a potato idea. I imagine lots of companies like Amazon would pay their workers a dollar an hour if they could get away with it. Furthermore, if people can't afford to sustain themselves legally then they'll turn to crime.

Everything you just posted is ideological, not to mention, very left wing biased. What you just posted are the same ideologies that the Clinton Foundation pushes. So what website did you get this information from? Its very consistent to their ideologies. You seem to be rewriting one of their articles. Are you plagiarizing?

Guarantee my understanding of micro, macro and international economics as well as quantitative economics is stronger than yours.

Not a high bar though- The mere fact that you think wages are a function of tax rates is proof enough of that.

So Aussies are taxes based on income?

You didn’t seem to realize the cost of living differences, so I think you over estimate yourself. You’re right, that bar is set low, considering that was simple.

Taxes are a subset of fiscal policy champ.

Cost of living doesn’t impact on labour market supply and demand conditions. At least not in the short run.

You can read more in any introductory econ textbook.

What??!!!

Anachron are you secretly in support of single payer healthcare, abolishing the FICA puppet show and simply funding SS and Medicare from general tax receipts thus freeing capital from direct responsibility for said benefits?

You know that would save businesses a boatload of cash even if there were a concomitant increase in wages and corporate taxes.Less than you may believe as business can only pass on as much of their costs as consumers are willing to absorb and no more.Again not as much as you may think. The cost of automation is dropping while the cost of human labor is not, and that is unlikely to change.

I don't think anyone paid it much attention, but if a "farm robot" selling for less than $5,000 can replace human field workers in India then there are many jobs that will be eliminated because a human in competition won't be able to work at that pace for a wage that will feed them.

Keeping down the wages of the people that still have jobs will only make those who are working poorer. It won't cause businesses to stop moving to automation.I don't believe that this is any more likely due to an increase in the base wage.

As Kraken himself pointed out inflation is largely political and is created by the central bank.Recent increases in the US minimum wage do not support this position.

False.

Raising the wage to $15 should:

- reduce the number of workers eligible for taxpayer supported government programs
- lead to higher wages for many mid-range jobs presently being paid around $15
- increase federal tax receipts
- lift 1.3 million people out of poverty [if the CBO study holds true]I think for myself thank you very much. Credit or blame.

You are labeling me with a political ideology because you don't like my facts.

I read a lot. I read that Medium article the year it was published. Same for the CBO report.

I grew up with a grandpa who watched the news and would dissect what was factually going on vs. how it was being spun in the press. I read the daily newspaper most days, almost always the Sunday edition, and when I had access via my job I used to read both the NYT and the WSJ.

^^^agree with the above and also note:
-labour is a supply like anything else, with the price being an hourly wage. Raising the price, all else equal, increases supply. Either more people in the workforce or individuals working more hours.
-the wage bill is a tax deduction for companies. So it’s not a 100% loss or a straight 1:1 addition to the cost base. Unless of course they are large corporations paying zero tax… in which case good. Finally an effective means of taxing them.
-it goes without saying but anyway: increases to the minimum wage only affect that portion of the population whose wage is between the old minimum and the new. That would be relatively few.
-poor people have a higher propensity to spend. So yes they will spend more. This *might* have an impact on inflation for some of the CPI basket of goods. However by definition, poor people tend to spend money on goods with low price elasticity (essentials) Petrol, housing etc. Petrol prices are set in international markets. House pricing is a combination of factors including monetary policy. So the short run inflationary impacts may be unknown.


In any case in the battle for profit share labour has been getting its ass handed back to it by capital for what, 50 years? An increase to the minimum wage to $15 an hour won’t change that.

So be more like Europe and eliminate convenience jobs? I actually like that they have less convenience options there.

Some of yall need to read this. Thomas Sowell describes this in phases. The assessments done are mostly just “phase one”, in which the effects are immediate, however, over time the negative effects occur, and, some effecrts are difficult to measure and go unreported, like decreases in benefits, fringe benefits, job perks, and hiring freezes, and lay offs when costs over time accumulate. 80% of studies done end up showing a negative impact, especially in “phase two”. It also explains that big businesses benefit the most because, like Amazon, they can afford to pay higher wages, but it’s the small businesses hiring college, high school, and uneducated workers that suffer the most. Not surprised, as we know government intervention seems to always create monopolies. So big business benefits and small business loses, as always. What’s interesting is that people that “hate” monopolies and big businesses will just make concessions “but but but it helps people!”

It’s not just job lost, its millions and millions of hours cut too, keep in mind, as well as losses of benefits.

https://www.cato.org/article/lets-ta...5-minimum-wage

^^^classic example of confirmation bias

People don’t challenge unsubstantiated assertions when they support their own strongly held beliefsYou would only think that’s a counter argument if you didn’t understand the difference between nominal prices/wages and real

Imagine thinking that the reason someone disagrees with you is because they don’t understand your argument, as opposed to knowing more about the topic

(Dunning-Kruger btw)

original as always

America the home of capitalism but loads of other countries around the world have a reasonable minimum wage and they are doing just fine thank-you very much.

The idea that with a decent minimum wage the economy would collapse is just retarded, there's enough money to go round, CEO's 100k a day just have to manage on 99k a day instead that's all.

I’m nothing if not multi-talented