On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, Gregory A. Coolidge wrote:
> The claim that an increase in the minimum wage equals an increase in prices,
> and therefore, the poor will not actually be helped, is a bit disconcerting.
> The claim supposes that a raise in the minimum wage means that all
> prices will raise due to higher labor costs. In actuality, the only
> prices directly related to an increase in the minimum wage, are from those
> products produced by minimum wage labor (we don't suppose that all labor
[text deleted]
> will be better off. My argument fails, if we suppose that an increase in the
> minimum wage means that all other wages will also increase, due to the
> competition for labor (all prices will go up accordingly on all goods).
> However, such a supposition is quite problematic, given the employment
> situation in most capitalistic countries, where labor forces are shrinking,
> rather than growing. Who need offer an increase in wages in such a
> competitive enviornremnt?
If I'm making $5 an hour and have worked here two years
and now the minimum wage for a beginning employee will be $5,
I think I would expect some kind of raise.
Labor forces are shrinking? I thought it was just the opposite.
What is shrinking is people who are willing to work for the
minimum wage when they can subtract the cost of working and sit
home for just as much net gain in income from welfare.
>
> One more thing. It's a good thing, as a matter of social policy, if an
> increase in the minimum wage causes some industries to leave the American
> market. I do not want individuals employed in work that cannot sustain an
> acceptable standard of living. If such industries cannot afford to pay
> $5.25/hr and remain competitive, then I'm glad to see you go. As a matter of
> social policy, and social equity, I would rather have extensive social welfare
> than having people work in menial jobs that cannot sustain a decent standard
> of living.
>
But isn't a third alternative possible? Wouldn't it be better to
face a rise in prices and a cut in dividends and have people work
for a livable minimum wage that can sustain a decent standard of
living?
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
******************************************************************************
> The claim that an increase in the minimum wage equals an increase in prices,
> and therefore, the poor will not actually be helped, is a bit disconcerting.
> The claim supposes that a raise in the minimum wage means that all
> prices will raise due to higher labor costs. In actuality, the only
> prices directly related to an increase in the minimum wage, are from those
> products produced by minimum wage labor (we don't suppose that all labor
[text deleted]
> will be better off. My argument fails, if we suppose that an increase in the
> minimum wage means that all other wages will also increase, due to the
> competition for labor (all prices will go up accordingly on all goods).
> However, such a supposition is quite problematic, given the employment
> situation in most capitalistic countries, where labor forces are shrinking,
> rather than growing. Who need offer an increase in wages in such a
> competitive enviornremnt?
If I'm making $5 an hour and have worked here two years
and now the minimum wage for a beginning employee will be $5,
I think I would expect some kind of raise.
Labor forces are shrinking? I thought it was just the opposite.
What is shrinking is people who are willing to work for the
minimum wage when they can subtract the cost of working and sit
home for just as much net gain in income from welfare.
>
> One more thing. It's a good thing, as a matter of social policy, if an
> increase in the minimum wage causes some industries to leave the American
> market. I do not want individuals employed in work that cannot sustain an
> acceptable standard of living. If such industries cannot afford to pay
> $5.25/hr and remain competitive, then I'm glad to see you go. As a matter of
> social policy, and social equity, I would rather have extensive social welfare
> than having people work in menial jobs that cannot sustain a decent standard
> of living.
>
But isn't a third alternative possible? Wouldn't it be better to
face a rise in prices and a cut in dividends and have people work
for a livable minimum wage that can sustain a decent standard of
living?
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
******************************************************************************