Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Minimum Wage laws? (POLL)

Announcements Posted on
We're up for a Webby! Vote TSR to help us win. 10-04-2014
  • View Poll Results: What do you think about minimum wage laws?
    Minimum wage is not enough and should be increased
    133
    45.08%
    Minimum wage is just right and should be left alone
    95
    32.20%
    Minimum wage is too high and should be lowered
    19
    6.44%
    Minimum wage laws should not exist at all
    48
    16.27%

    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by captainaesthetic)
    We have a lower unemployment rate than Italy and Germany,.
    Germany 5.6% http://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/e...y+unemployment

    UK 8.2% http://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/e...k+unemployment
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Do you?
    So find me some research to suggest it hasn't.
    Stewart (2002) as well as plenty of literature from alan manning. Minimum wage proved to be negative for US, but most UK studies find no significant impact.
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    All the people who voted for a minimum wage are so deluded it's unbelievable.


    Before you neg me, go look up "libertarianism". You might actually learn something.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:


    This explains it pretty well. The victims of the minimum wage aren't aware they are hurt.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    That can't be right considering it's been reported it just fell to 7.0 by http://news.yahoo.com/german-unemplo...--finance.html and http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-05/D9UGHP2O0.htm
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Don't they get governmental benefits to cover the lack of money?




    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum...tbook_model.22
    These seem quite interesting

    "Opponents of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:

    As a labor market analogue of political-economic protectionism, it excludes low cost competitors from labor markets and hampers firms in reducing wage costs during trade downturns. This generates various industrial-economic inefficiencies.[38]
    Hurts small business more than large business.[39]
    Reduces quantity demanded of workers, either through a reduction in the number of hours worked by individuals, or through a reduction in the number of jobs.[40][41]
    May cause price inflation as businesses try to compensate by raising the prices of the goods being sold.[42][43]
    Benefits some workers at the expense of the poorest and least productive.[44]
    Can result in the exclusion of certain groups from the labor force.[45]
    Small firms with limited payroll budgets cannot offer their most valuable employees fair and attractive wages above unskilled workers paid the artificially high minimum, and see a rising hurdle-cost of adding workers.[39]
    Is less effective than other methods (e.g. the Earned Income Tax Credit) at reducing poverty, and is more damaging to businesses than those other methods.[46]
    Discourages further education among the poor by enticing people to enter the job market.[46]
    Discriminates against, through pricing out, less qualified workers (including newcomers to the labor market, e.g. young workers) by keeping them from accumulating work experience and qualifications, hence potentially graduating to higher wages later. (This may be a reason why trade unions press for minimum wages, i.e. to protect older workers on the job from the competition of younger, cheaper workers on the job market, for a given level of productivity."

    What do you think about a negative income tax?
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Possibly but when you have a law that says employers can pay whatever they want to employees, you can be sure someone somewhere is being exploited and taken advantage of. Then who has to fork out the bill to cover his other expenses that his jobs salary can't cover? Tax payer.
    Yes.

    It is much better to have a safety net for people than regulations that do not even achieve their goals.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by captainaesthetic)
    You mean lower unemployment rate, right?
    We have a lower unemployment rate than Italy and Germany, who don't have a minimum wage, because there are other factors involved with those countries such as the eurozone crisis that cause lower demand for labour in those countries.

    Direct intervention in a market fixing a price level, ceteris paribus, causes excess supply on the most basic economic level, I don't see the debate here.
    Well, to be fair, Britain and the US always had (I think) lower unemployment rates than Germany[1] and Italy - euro crisis or non-euro crisis.

    It's a good question though (I don't know what the answer is but seriously, differences of 3% in unemployment cannot be accounted for by the existence of a minimum wage - not even the most strong opponents of the NMW think that)


    [1] I actually think, at the moment, the US and Britain have higher unemployment rates than Germany.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by electriic_ink)


    This explains it pretty well.
    A libertarian site supporting the abolitionment of minimum wage, might as well link me to a socialist site showing how central planned economy can work or a anarchist site showing how a statless society can work.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Can't believe people are voting for increasing it. Do you realize how comfortable people can live on minimum wage with the right budgeting? It's not a hard knock life especially when we give people on minimum wage additional governmental benefits. Plus, you can't possibly be under the assumption that increasing minimum wage won't have a effect on pricing and that would just render it pointless. It's like suggesting we print more money to solve poverty. There's a optimal amount sure, which is why I agree with minimum wage laws but that optimal amount won't be what you're expecting.
    Surely this supports the view that minimum wage is not high enough, if people who are working full time require additional government support in order to be able to live and support a family. This is even if both parents are working as then there would be childcare costs.

    You can't possibly support the view that this government wants to make work pay, as they have claimed (though not you I know), yet at the same time not support a living wage.

    Incidental where do you think the optimal amount would be?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    There should be globally enforced increased minimum wages and a maximum wage to ensure a more equitable distribution of wealth. Say a range of £10-£100 an hour, as current minimum wages are barely livable.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    A libertarian site supporting the abolitionment of minimum wage, might as well link me to a socialist site showing how central planned economy can work or a anarchist site showing how a statless society can work.
    Ever heard of the ad hominem logical fallacy?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Just because milton friedman said it, doesn't make it true!
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fynch101)
    Stewart (2002) as well as plenty of literature from alan manning. Minimum wage proved to be negative for US, but most UK studies find no significant impact.
    I hinted earlier that the minimum wage has been much more damming in the US than the UK/europe, friedman did always argue that progressive socio-economic policy often works wonders in small homogenous nations. It was in his last interview in fact, I have it in a thread here http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=1877865, its about half way.

    I've always argued the same in other areas, completely nationalised, or "socialised" for the yanks, healthcare, in my opinion ... would be a complete disaster in a huge federalised nation such as the US, but workd well for Wester European countries.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by undertaker1)
    this

    why should unskilled dumb low wage workers be protected. it's their fault for not working harder in life
    I hate this culture in the UK where everyone should be equal. the people who work hard in life should also pay for others who don't by paying ridiculous levels of tax. All these stupid chavs who walk around all day, ain't a care in the world and are still able to wear all their ridiculously priced chavy clothes. clearly their receiving toooo much in benefits and/or wages.

    no one has respect for each other because were all 'equal'. no respects the fantastic National Heath Service because its free. we are so lucky to have a free national health service but it doesn't get the appreciation it deserves.

    lol at the neg reps, no wonder this country's getting worse
    unskilled dumb low wage workers?

    wow. talk about prejudice. no wonder this country's getting worse.

    see what i did there?
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blueray)
    All the people who voted for a minimum wage are so deluded it's unbelievable.


    Before you neg me, go look up "libertarianism". You might actually learn something.
    I thought you were a raging leftist?

    Unless, this is ironic post, and you are trying to bamboozle all the libt juniors into discovering that libertarianism is supposed to mean anarchist socialism.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    I hinted earlier that the minimum wage has been much more damming in the US than the UK/europe, friedman did always argue that progressive socio-economic policy often works wonders in small homogenous nations. It was in his last interview in fact, I have it in a thread here http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=1877865, its about half way.

    I've always argued the same in other areas, completely nationalised, or "socialised" for the yanks, healthcare, in my opinion ... would be a complete disaster in a huge federalised nation such as the US, but workd well for Wester European countries.
    Its genuinely nice to see that you can think dynamically, too much conjecture in debates like these, not nearly enough fact.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Annoying-Mouse)
    Don't they get governmental benefits to cover the lack of money?
    They are put into these jobs usually as a threat to stop them from claiming long-term unemployment benefits. I'm 99% sure that the benefits still continue whilst they doing these jobs............Now you could argue, "why are these people on benefits then? They could surely get a proper job and therefore avoid the necessity of being forced to work for one euro an hour in a menial job".

    But what if you had a poor education and could only find employment in a menial job? (Cleaner, cafeteria cook etc). Because there is no minimum wage for these jobs in Germany where is the attraction in giving up your benefits and going to work for 2.50 euro an hour?

    You do the Maths, register for benefits and get free healthcare, free housing, free transport ticket, a 1 euro an hour job AND unemployment benefits (money). Or work in a menial job for 2.50 Euro an hour because there is no minimal wage. What would you choose?
    • 52 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    I thought you were a raging leftist?

    Unless, this is ironic post, and you are trying to bamboozle all the libt juniors into discovering that libertarianism is supposed to mean anarchist socialism.
    No, I actually understand how the economy works surprisingly enough and that big governments tend to have big corruption, so to speak.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    These seem quite interesting

    "Opponents of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:

    As a labor market analogue of political-economic protectionism, it excludes low cost competitors from labor markets and hampers firms in reducing wage costs during trade downturns. This generates various industrial-economic inefficiencies.[38]
    Hurts small business more than large business.[39]
    Reduces quantity demanded of workers, either through a reduction in the number of hours worked by individuals, or through a reduction in the number of jobs.[40][41]
    May cause price inflation as businesses try to compensate by raising the prices of the goods being sold.[42][43]
    Benefits some workers at the expense of the poorest and least productive.[44]
    Can result in the exclusion of certain groups from the labor force.[45]
    Small firms with limited payroll budgets cannot offer their most valuable employees fair and attractive wages above unskilled workers paid the artificially high minimum, and see a rising hurdle-cost of adding workers.[39]
    Is less effective than other methods (e.g. the Earned Income Tax Credit) at reducing poverty, and is more damaging to businesses than those other methods.[46]
    Discourages further education among the poor by enticing people to enter the job market.[46]
    Discriminates against, through pricing out, less qualified workers (including newcomers to the labor market, e.g. young workers) by keeping them from accumulating work experience and qualifications, hence potentially graduating to higher wages later. (This may be a reason why trade unions press for minimum wages, i.e. to protect older workers on the job from the competition of younger, cheaper workers on the job market, for a given level of productivity."

    What do you think about a negative income tax?
    I am well aware of the theoretical reasons for claiming that the NMW causes unemployment. I have actually studied the neo-classical theory this semester at uni. You were asking for one study though which contradicted this orthodox view. And there are many (which are acknowledged by neo-classical free-market economists like Steven Landsburg)[1]. Read the whole thing.

    I definitely agree that the EITC is more effective and this is somehat related to what I argued earlier (check my earlier posts on this thread). A minimum wage is not as effective a mechanism for reducing poverty as the EITC but together they can be very effective. Not sure if this is answering your question.

    [1]"In fact, the power of the minimum wage to kill jobs has been greatly overestimated. Nowadays, most labor economists will tell you that that minimum wages have at most a tiny impact on employment."

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: June 3, 2012
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.