Michigan considers $10 minimum wage

[Frisivisia]

For an Obamacult post, you had a severe lack of empirical, logical, rational, peer-reviewed, fact-checked, objective, sourced, non-biased evidence to support your claims. Oh wait, that's because reality vaporizes your beliefs on contact.

Amusingly and predictably, your post is the very definition of an argument that is completely devoid of fact, logic and empirically supported evidence.

Yet again, you prove my point, even if you don't realize it.

I don't have to have evidence to point out that you don't have evidence. I'm rather surprised in that regard, usually you have a ridiculous amount of information that just doesn't make any sense, but now you don't have any.

[Obamacult]

Amusingly and predictably, your post is the very definition of an argument that is completely devoid of fact, logic and empirically supported evidence.

Yet again, you prove my point, even if you don't realize it.

I don't have to have evidence to point out that you don't have evidence. I'm rather surprised in that regard, usually you have a ridiculous amount of information that just doesn't make any sense, but now you don't have any.

I made a logical argument, refute it with something other than your usual inane retort.

The effect of MW laws are most felt among the lowest skilled workers (youth). In contrast, high paid union workers and other entrenched politically protected workers welcome MW laws for the simple fact that artificially forcing up wages on the bottom of the scale insures that wages are forced up along the entire spectrum and further protected and insulated from the effects of economic reality and competition (at least temporarily until economic reality corrects this imbalance).

Also, artificial increases in the MW make it less likely that a company would hire and train two unskilled workers ($7.50 x 2 =$15) to do the job of a semi-skilled worker $15/hour. This is the reason why entrenched labor (unions) lobby for minimum wage laws. Hence, it is preferable to them that the youth remain unemployed and increasingly denied future prospects, training and experience so they can reap the monetary benefits of politically protected jobs and pay.

Lastly, it could be argued that MW laws further destroy opportunities for those most in need of highly beneficial and necessary 'bootstrap' jobs by incentivising business and industry to forego human labor by making investments into developing robotics and automated systems to replace workers.

Indeed, as progressive policies have made manufacturing workers more expensive to employers, these industries have hastily followed suit to avoid insolvency with more automation and hence more productivity. However, this has been unnecessarily forced on the market from which change would have been more measured, transitory, economically responsible and less traumatic for those losing jobs.

Paradoxically, we can 'thank' well-intentioned progressive policies for both destroying American jobs and increasing American productivity. Nonetheless, these ideologues don't have a clue of the unintended consequences of their ad hoc knee jerk legislation other than the fact that it personally makes them feel good (and gains favor from low information voters) at the time these destructive policies are implemented.

'we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it' -- Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare, 2010

[Ovisterra]

Ours is higher than that, and we don't seem to have died/been smote, so I say go ahead.

[Frisivisia]

I don't have to have evidence to point out that you don't have evidence. I'm rather surprised in that regard, usually you have a ridiculous amount of information that just doesn't make any sense, but now you don't have any.

I made a logical argument, refute it with something other than your usual inane retort.

The effect of MW laws are most felt among the lowest skilled workers (youth). In contrast, high paid union workers and other entrenched politically protected workers welcome MW laws for the simple fact that artificially forcing up wages on the bottom of the scale insures that wages are forced up along the entire spectrum and further protected and insulated from the effects of economic reality and competition (at least temporarily until economic reality corrects this imbalance).

Also, artificial increases in the MW make it less likely that a company would hire and train two unskilled workers ($7.50 x 2 =$15) to do the job of a semi-skilled worker $15/hour. This is the reason why entrenched labor (unions) lobby for minimum wage laws. Hence, it is preferable to them that the youth remain unemployed and increasingly denied future prospects, training and experience so they can reap the monetary benefits of politically protected jobs and pay.

Lastly, it could be argued that MW laws further destroy opportunities for those most in need of highly beneficial and necessary 'bootstrap' jobs by incentivising business and industry to forego human labor by making investments into developing robotics and automated systems to replace workers.

Indeed, as progressive policies have made manufacturing workers more expensive to employers, these industries have hastily followed suit to avoid insolvency with more automation and hence more productivity. However, this has been unnecessarily forced on the market from which change would have been more measured, transitory, economically responsible and less traumatic for those losing jobs.

Paradoxically, we can 'thank' well-intentioned progressive policies for both destroying American jobs and increasing American productivity. Nonetheless, these ideologues don't have a clue of the unintended consequences of their ad hoc knee jerk legislation other than the fact that it personally makes them feel good (and gains favor from low information voters) at the time these destructive policies are implemented.

'we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it' -- Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare, 2010

Arguing your ridiculous hypotheticals isn't fun or interesting.

[Obamacult]

I made a logical argument, refute it with something other than your usual inane retort.

The effect of MW laws are most felt among the lowest skilled workers (youth). In contrast, high paid union workers and other entrenched politically protected workers welcome MW laws for the simple fact that artificially forcing up wages on the bottom of the scale insures that wages are forced up along the entire spectrum and further protected and insulated from the effects of economic reality and competition (at least temporarily until economic reality corrects this imbalance).

Also, artificial increases in the MW make it less likely that a company would hire and train two unskilled workers ($7.50 x 2 =$15) to do the job of a semi-skilled worker $15/hour. This is the reason why entrenched labor (unions) lobby for minimum wage laws. Hence, it is preferable to them that the youth remain unemployed and increasingly denied future prospects, training and experience so they can reap the monetary benefits of politically protected jobs and pay.

Lastly, it could be argued that MW laws further destroy opportunities for those most in need of highly beneficial and necessary 'bootstrap' jobs by incentivising business and industry to forego human labor by making investments into developing robotics and automated systems to replace workers.

Indeed, as progressive policies have made manufacturing workers more expensive to employers, these industries have hastily followed suit to avoid insolvency with more automation and hence more productivity. However, this has been unnecessarily forced on the market from which change would have been more measured, transitory, economically responsible and less traumatic for those losing jobs.

Paradoxically, we can 'thank' well-intentioned progressive policies for both destroying American jobs and increasing American productivity. Nonetheless, these ideologues don't have a clue of the unintended consequences of their ad hoc knee jerk legislation other than the fact that it personally makes them feel good (and gains favor from low information voters) at the time these destructive policies are implemented.

'we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it' -- Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare, 2010

Arguing your ridiculous hypotheticals isn't fun or interesting.

Typically, if you don't have the wherewithal to challenge an idea or post -- just run from it or make another inane retort completely devoid of any substantive objective, factual, logical or empirically supported argument.

Some things never change.

[Frisivisia]

Arguing your ridiculous hypotheticals isn't fun or interesting.

Typically, if you don't have the wherewithal to challenge an idea or post -- just run from it or make another inane retort completely devoid of any substantive objective, factual, logical or empirically supported argument.

Some things never change.

*yawn*

You're so boring and predictable. It's not even fun arguing with you.

[Freiheit Reich]

Yes, well done! I am happy that this state will lose more jobs, maybe some of those jobs can go to states that are better to live in and more business friendly such as Texas, South Dakota, and Oklahoma. Michigan doesn't deserve businesses until they become more business friendly.

I hope when more people are unemployed and poor in Michigan the politicians decide to raise the minimum wage even higher to $12 an hour to "help" the people even more.

Your whole "higher minimum wage causes unemployment" thing is bullshit.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412

http://www.epi.org/publication/statement-epi-minimum-wage/

Oh shit, I even have facts! And you don't!

OK, you need facts:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 69840.html

http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/lab ... -wage-laws

http://www.conservapedia.com/Minimum_wage

http://www.moneynews.com/NealAsbury/min ... /id/494620

[YellowApple]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Minimum_wage

Wait, what?

Conservapedia?

The wiki that references its blatant political leanings right there in the name?

...

Really?

I'm tempted to create an account there just so I can sweep through that article and attach a nice healthy ^{[citation needed]} on each and every one of the many unsourced assertions throughout that article.

[Freiheit Reich]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Minimum_wage

Wait, what?

Conservapedia?

The wiki that references its blatant political leanings right there in the name?

...

Really?

I'm tempted to create an account there just so I can sweep through that article and attach a nice healthy ^{[citation needed]} on each and every one of the many unsourced assertions throughout that article.

I included it because they cited sources in their page.

[Lemanrussland]

Wait, what?

Conservapedia?

The wiki that references its blatant political leanings right there in the name?

...

Really?

I'm tempted to create an account there just so I can sweep through that article and attach a nice healthy ^{[citation needed]} on each and every one of the many unsourced assertions throughout that article.

I included it because they cited sources in their page.

You should include those sources, not link to an obvious parody site (though it was intended as a serious website at fist, it's full of trolls defacing articles and writing blatant nonsense, and also, I would assume anyway, people who actually believe some of the stuff written on that website, like for example, that the general theory of relativity is "liberal claptrap".)

[Heavenly Peace]

Forcing employers to pay their employees more than the value of their work will mean that it would be far cheaper for the employer to simply sack some of his staff, close shop, or move his business somewhere else, to a place that is not affected by this law. This results in less job opportunities for citizens in their area and because of this they will be forced to either seek employment elsewhere or take up the dole. The minimum wage especially hurts unskilled workers as it removes the first rungs from the ladder of economic mobility by preventing them from finding low-pay work which would assist them in bulking their CV, increasing their prospects of future better paid employment.

[Frisivisia]

Forcing employers to pay their employees more than the value of their work will mean that it would be far cheaper for the employer to simply sack his some of his staff, close shop, or move his business somewhere else, to a place that is not affected by this law. This results in less job opportunities for citizens in their area and because of this they will be forced to either seek employment elsewhere or take up the dole. The minimum wage especially hurts unskilled workers as it removes the first rungs from the ladder of economic mobility by preventing them from finding low-pay work which would assist them in bulking their CV, increasing their prospects of future better paid employment.

[citation needed]

[Heavenly Peace]

Forcing employers to pay their employees more than the value of their work will mean that it would be far cheaper for the employer to simply sack his some of his staff, close shop, or move his business somewhere else, to a place that is not affected by this law. This results in less job opportunities for citizens in their area and because of this they will be forced to either seek employment elsewhere or take up the dole. The minimum wage especially hurts unskilled workers as it removes the first rungs from the ladder of economic mobility by preventing them from finding low-pay work which would assist them in bulking their CV, increasing their prospects of future better paid employment.

[citation needed]

http://www.nber.org/digest/apr98/w6111.html

"In France, the minimum wage has been rising in real terms in the last five decades. Between 1951 and 1994, the French minimum wage rose from 1.95 francs an hour to 6.92 francs an hour in 1994, both measured in 1970 francs, an increase of 255 percent. The French minimum wage in 1994, measured in 1997 dollars, was over $6.50 an hour.

To check for an effect of the minimum wage, the authors tracked the employment of workers whose wage, just prior to the increase, was above the previous minimum wage but below the new higher minimum wage. Such workers, they reason, would be most likely to be priced out of work by the increase in the minimum wage. The authors find that, for French men aged 25 to 30 who were in this marginal category, an increase of 1 percent in the minimum wage reduced their probability of keeping their job by 4.6 percent."

[Lemanrussland]

Forcing employers to pay their employees more than the value of their work will mean that it would be far cheaper for the employer to simply sack his some of his staff, close shop, or move his business somewhere else, to a place that is not affected by this law. This results in less job opportunities for citizens in their area and because of this they will be forced to either seek employment elsewhere or take up the dole. The minimum wage especially hurts unskilled workers as it removes the first rungs from the ladder of economic mobility by preventing them from finding low-pay work which would assist them in bulking their CV, increasing their prospects of future better paid employment.

Everything in this is correct.

Minimum wage also interferes with economic recovery, at least according to neoclassical macroeconomic theory. To neoclassicals, what unemployment actually is is a glut or oversupply of labor. In a regular labor market, neoclassicals argue that wages and prices will naturally tend to an equilibrium, causing wages and prices to be in line with labor supply, with neither an oversupply of labor, or a shortage of labor (though there will be always unemployed people, simply due to frictional unemployment, where some workers are inbetween jobs or are moving out of education to go get a job, and structurally unemployed people, who are unable to find jobs due to things like medical conditions, laziness, lack of job skills etc.). So for unemployment to be remedied, wages must be allowed to fall, which allows businesses to hire up more workers, and then after that, prices fall, stimulating demand and getting the economy moving again.

When the government puts a price floor on wages, it prevents the labor market from reaching equilibrium, perpetuating unemployment and stunted demand.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Minimum_wage

Yeah, so I conducted a linear regression for the data set they presented, and while there is technically a positive correlation between the two from just looking at the regression itself, if we calculate the correlation coefficient (coming in at 0.36), which they conspicuously omitted, and then derive the coefficient of determination from that (which indicates the 'goodness of fit' of a regression model), which is just 0.13, there a very limited statistical correlation between minimum wage and unemployment. It's a weak relationship, and because it is so weak, the door is wide open for other factors that more accurately explain the variation in unemployment in those states. That data set isn't a strong supporting argument.

For some perspective, a coefficient of determination of 0.13 indicates that the predictor 'minumum wage' accounts for very little of the variance in unemployment. That's quite a dishonest website.

This is an image of the scatter plot, too:

[Frisivisia]

[citation needed]

[url][/url]


http://www.nber.org/digest/apr98/w6111.html

"In France, the minimum wage has been rising in real terms in the last five decades. Between 1951 and 1994, the French minimum wage rose from 1.95 francs an hour to 6.92 francs an hour in 1994, both measured in 1970 francs, an increase of 255 percent. The French minimum wage in 1994, measured in 1997 dollars, was over $6.50 an hour.

To check for an effect of the minimum wage, the authors tracked the employment of workers whose wage, just prior to the increase, was above the previous minimum wage but below the new higher minimum wage. Such workers, they reason, would be most likely to be priced out of work by the increase in the minimum wage. The authors find that, for French men aged 25 to 30 who were in this marginal category, an increase of 1 percent in the minimum wage reduced their probability of keeping their job by 4.6 percent."

A study of just French men aged 21-25. Hmm, I'm going to call bullshit.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412
http://www.epi.org/publication/statement-epi-minimum-wage/

Here's some sources that say that higher minimum wage does not correlate with higher unemployment.

[Heavenly Peace]

[url][/url]


http://www.nber.org/digest/apr98/w6111.html

"In France, the minimum wage has been rising in real terms in the last five decades. Between 1951 and 1994, the French minimum wage rose from 1.95 francs an hour to 6.92 francs an hour in 1994, both measured in 1970 francs, an increase of 255 percent. The French minimum wage in 1994, measured in 1997 dollars, was over $6.50 an hour.

To check for an effect of the minimum wage, the authors tracked the employment of workers whose wage, just prior to the increase, was above the previous minimum wage but below the new higher minimum wage. Such workers, they reason, would be most likely to be priced out of work by the increase in the minimum wage. The authors find that, for French men aged 25 to 30 who were in this marginal category, an increase of 1 percent in the minimum wage reduced their probability of keeping their job by 4.6 percent."

A study of just French men aged 21-25. Hmm, I'm going to call bullshit.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412
http://www.epi.org/publication/statement-epi-minimum-wage/

Here's some sources that say that higher minimum wage does not correlate with higher unemployment.

Do we really have to have a source war? We aren't going to get anywhere as I can equally provide you with a long list of links which argue the opposite.

If you don't agree with my statement, debate it and tell me why I am wrong, don't just throw websites at me.

[Frisivisia]

A study of just French men aged 21-25. Hmm, I'm going to call bullshit.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412
http://www.epi.org/publication/statement-epi-minimum-wage/

Here's some sources that say that higher minimum wage does not correlate with higher unemployment.

Do we really have to have a source war? We aren't going to get anywhere as I can equally provide you with a long list of links which argue the opposite.

If you don't agree with my statement. Debate it and tell me why I am wrong, don't just throw websites at me.

I'm giving you evidence that proves you wrong. Your evidence was poor at best, and it was a study following a small number of French men in a very particular age group. I have no desire to argue the ridiculous hypotheticals that many on the economic right like to pretend are fact, I am presenting evidence that says that economic theory means exactly shit when you look at what happens in the real world.

[Heavenly Peace]

Do we really have to have a source war? We aren't going to get anywhere as I can equally provide you with a long list of links which argue the opposite.

If you don't agree with my statement. Debate it and tell me why I am wrong, don't just throw websites at me.

I'm giving you evidence that proves you wrong. Your evidence was poor at best, and it was a study following a small number of French men in a very particular age group.

I was stating that the minimum wage harms the prospect of unskilled workers. This study found that it did lower the probability of unskilled French workers finding work after it was raised in France. The 'particular age group' you speak of is the one which houses the greatest amount of unskilled workers and the unemployed, ergo the study supports my point.

I have no desire to argue the ridiculous hypotheticals that many on the economic right like to pretend are fact, I am presenting evidence that says that economic theory means exactly shit when you look at what happens in the real world.

Ridiculous hypotheticals? If you don't understand economics don't try and argue about it.

Download this empirical evidence based report courtesy of the a professor at University of California-Irvine and one of governors on the board of at the Federal Reserve System.

http://ideas.repec.org/p/irv/wpaper/060708.html

[Frisivisia]

I'm giving you evidence that proves you wrong. Your evidence was poor at best, and it was a study following a small number of French men in a very particular age group.

I was stating that the minimum wage harms the prospect of unskilled workers. This study found that it did lower the probability of unskilled French workers finding work after it was raised in France. The 'particular age group' you speak of is the one which houses the greatest amount of unskilled workers and the unemployed, ergo the study supports my point.

I have no desire to argue the ridiculous hypotheticals that many on the economic right like to pretend are fact, I am presenting evidence that says that economic theory means exactly shit when you look at what happens in the real world.

Ridiculous hypotheticals? If you don't understand economics don't try and argue about it.

Download this empirical evidence based report courtesy of the a professor at University of California-Irvine and one of governors on the board of at the Federal Reserve System.

http://ideas.repec.org/p/irv/wpaper/060708.html

The whole "ignoring my evidence" thing really does wonders for your argument.

[Heavenly Peace]

A study of just French men aged 21-25. Hmm, I'm going to call bullshit.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412
http://www.epi.org/publication/statement-epi-minimum-wage/

Here's some sources that say that higher minimum wage does not correlate with higher unemployment.

http://davidcard.berkeley.edu/papers/njmin-aer.pdf

- The minimum wage in this case study was only raised by $0.80. This was not enough to cause a significant noticeable economic impact on the current climate so it is no surprise that they found it had no effects on employment rates. The study only proves that raising a pre-existing minimum wage by a small amount has little effect on the unemployment figures but it ignores the question as to whether the maintenance of the minimum wage has increased unemployment since its introduction.

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/5412

- I have to register an account in order to access the report and I do not have the time to do so.


http://www.epi.org/publication/statemen ... nimum-wage

- Again, unable to access this study.

[Heavenly Peace]

The whole "ignoring my evidence" thing really does wonders for your argument.

I have been as kind to address your's now please take the liberty to view the report I equipped you with.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Wait, what?

Conservapedia?

The wiki that references its blatant political leanings right there in the name?

...

Really?

I'm tempted to create an account there just so I can sweep through that article and attach a nice healthy ^{[citation needed]} on each and every one of the many unsourced assertions throughout that article.

I included it because they cited sources in their page.

Hello newfriend, welcome to the internet.

You do realize that Conservapedia was almost immediately taken over by a vast array of trolls, right? It's a parody site now.

[Molfongo]

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/12/1861361/michigan-democrats-introduce-bill-to-increase-minimum-wage-to-10-an-hour/

Michigan workers were dealt a staggering blow last year when Gov. Rick Snyder (R) signed a so-called “right to work” law to gut unions. Democratic lawmakers introduced legislation on Friday that may help combat the negative effects of that law by raising the minimum wage from $7.40 to $10 an hour. Minimum wage in the state has not been raised since 2008.

The bill would gradually increase wages over the next 3 years, and could help mitigate income inequality, which is on the rise in Michigan:

Supporters of the bill, like Democratic Reps. John Switalksi and Rashida Tlaib, said that raising the minimum wage would offer people “a chance at a better life” while narrowing the inequality gap. Dave Woodward, who launched an online petition at http://www.raisemichigan.com, said that more than 70 percent of people living in Michigan are in favor of increasing the minimum wage.

Woodward said: “Right now, minimum wage workers and middle class families are doing their taxes and they’re finding their taxes going up because of policies by Gov. Snyder and Republicans in Lansing…It’s long overdue that Michigan families get a raise and raising the minimum wage helps do that.”

Currently, a minimum wage worker needs to work 80 hours a week in order to afford the rent for a two-bedroom apartment. Republicans claim the increase would hurt businesses’ ability to hire more people. Nevertheless, more than 70 percent of Michigan residents are in favor of increasing the minimum wage.

As Michigan’s poverty level rises, tax hikes on low-income workers coupled with increased cost of living have hit residents hard. Meanwhile, the state’s union-busting law crippled workers’ wage negotiating power and will likely cost all Michigan workers, union or otherwise, $1,500 a year in wages. Unfortunately, the national trend is to suppress wages, not raise them; since 2011, 105 wage suppression bills have been introduced in 31 states.

It'll be interesting to see the effects of this bill if it passes, although I doubt it will.

Okay, let's think about this as if I was a large corporation that produces marshmallows in Michigan. I have 500 employees who make minimum wage. All of a sudden, I am required to pay them $2.60 more. If the average employee works 30 hours a week, that's about 2 million dollars more that I'm spending a year on wages. To maintain profit (let's be honest, that's what these companies are concerned with) I can either lay off employees or increase prices on my marshmallows, or do both. Either way, the guys who apparently benefited from a pay raise are hurt.

I don't think this will pass, and I hope it doesn't.

[Condunum]

Arguing your ridiculous hypotheticals isn't fun or interesting.

Typically, if you don't have the wherewithal to challenge an idea or post -- just run from it or make another inane retort completely devoid of any substantive objective, factual, logical or empirically supported argument.

Some things never change.

This has just gotten so old hat.