On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Nicholas Dronen wrote:
>
> There is a tragic lack of knowledge of hard economic issues on this
> list. For > example, minimum wage laws *do* *lower* employment
> rates. Talk to any economist (a > person who has *studied* the issue)
> and s/he will tell you that when a government forces> firms to pay no
> less than $x/hr. to its employees, there is less money available to hire
> more people.
Put this way, raising the minimum wage doesn't sound like a
problem because who is asking anyone to hire MORE people?
The questionable assertion for me is that employers will have
to dismiss some employees to be able to pay the minimum wage.
This suggests that employers have more people on their payrolls
now than they need to get the job done, which doesn't seem
likely. So, if you follow that reasoning to its logical
conclusion, firing some employees would just mean paying overtime
at the higher wages or not getting the job done for the stock
holders. Hey, this is America, so we know that what will
happen when the minimum wage is raised is the same thing that
happens when the price of sugar goes up: candy bars will get
smaller or cost more.
But the rationale for raising the minimum wage is that no one
can live on the current one; if raising the minimum wage raises
prices, also, then it isn't a solution to the problem, is it?
So what is? Any possibility of stock-holders, etc. being satisfied
with smaller dividends or CEO's,etc, with lower wages? How about
more taxes for those with incomes over $100,000 a year and no
taxes for those with incomes under $15,000? (I didn't think so!)
Darlene Sybert, Instructor
http://www.missouri.edu/~engds/index.html
University of Missouri, Columbia (English Department)
*****************************************************************************
But words are things, and a small drop of ink,
Falling like dew, upon a thought, produces
That which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think.
-Lord Byron
******************************************************************************
>
> There is a tragic lack of knowledge of hard economic issues on this
> list. For > example, minimum wage laws *do* *lower* employment
> rates. Talk to any economist (a > person who has *studied* the issue)
> and s/he will tell you that when a government forces> firms to pay no
> less than $x/hr. to its employees, there is less money available to hire
> more people.
Put this way, raising the minimum wage doesn't sound like a
problem because who is asking anyone to hire MORE people?
The questionable assertion for me is that employers will have
to dismiss some employees to be able to pay the minimum wage.
This suggests that employers have more people on their payrolls
now than they need to get the job done, which doesn't seem
likely. So, if you follow that reasoning to its logical
conclusion, firing some employees would just mean paying overtime
at the higher wages or not getting the job done for the stock
holders. Hey, this is America, so we know that what will
happen when the minimum wage is raised is the same thing that
happens when the price of sugar goes up: candy bars will get
smaller or cost more.
But the rationale for raising the minimum wage is that no one
can live on the current one; if raising the minimum wage raises
prices, also, then it isn't a solution to the problem, is it?
So what is? Any possibility of stock-holders, etc. being satisfied
with smaller dividends or CEO's,etc, with lower wages? How about
more taxes for those with incomes over $100,000 a year and no
taxes for those with incomes under $15,000? (I didn't think so!)
Darlene Sybert, Instructor
http://www.missouri.edu/~engds/index.html
University of Missouri, Columbia (English Department)
*****************************************************************************
But words are things, and a small drop of ink,
Falling like dew, upon a thought, produces
That which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think.
-Lord Byron
******************************************************************************