Posted on 07/21/2014 9:27:34 AM PDT by Incorrigible
By Kevin McArdle July 21, 2014 5:14 AM
A new study by the Center for Economic and Research Policy shows that job growth in states that increased their minimum wages this year is far more robust when compared to states that did not hike the minimum wage.
Thirteen states increased their minimum wages in 2014, including New Jersey. According to the report, the average change in payrolls in states that implemented minimum wage hikes was 0.99 percent. For states that didn’t see a minimum wage hike, it was 0.68 percent.
However, the report said there is not a direct link between the two, but opponents and supporters of the Garden State’s wage increase both had something to say.
“It was nonsensical to debate whether we should raise the minimum wage in New Jersey by one dollar. It is a no brainer because that money was going to immediately be coming right back into our local economy,” said Assemblywoman Sheila Oliver (D-East Orange), who helped spearhead the effort to increase the wage.
In November, New Jersey voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot question to hike the wage from $7.25 an hour to $8.25 and to tie future increases to the rate of inflation every year. The increase went into effect on January 1.
Many in the Garden State business community fought against the minimum wage increase and aren’t convinced the study proves anything. What do they think the impact will be on employers?
“Honestly it’s too early to tell,” said David Brogan, first vice president with the New Jersey Business and Industry Association. “What we do know is that it’s a government mandated increase in labor costs. That money needs to come from somewhere. That could mean less hours, less bonuses, less shifts and potentially less employees.”
The wage increase is not only helping businesses find workers, it is helping them hold on to the employees that already have Oliver said.
“I think that we have thwarted the argument that it is a job killer,” Oliver said.
We don’t know the true impact, Brogan explained, because we don’t know how much of an increase we will see next year when the rate of inflation is calculated.
Not for commercial use. For educational and discussion purposes only.
It's one thing to have representatives vote to increase the minimum wage. But stupid New Jersey voters allowed the politicians to become completely unaccountable on this issue by making the raise automatic each year. Ugh.
No, they simply kill future hiring....
at the “best”.....
“CEPR acknowledges this analysis is far from scientific and draws no direct link between raising the minimum wage and payroll gains. Still, “it does provide evidence against theoretical negative employment effects of minimum wage increases,” CEPR researcher Ben Wolcott writes.”
So, the author of the study admits it proves nothing.
Tiny increases in minimum wage have very, little effect, either positive or negative, as very few people are affected.
Massive increases like the $15.00/hr rate coming to Seattle will kill thousands of jobs, and would kill millions if implemented nationally.
I have an idea....let’s raise the Minimum Wage to $47.50 an hour. By this logic it will quickly drive unemployment down to 2%.
bump
no mention that this is a liberal/progressive group....hmmm. A conservative group would undoubtedly be identified as such.
All this legislation does is devalue the purchasing power of the dollar and affixes a continuous inflationary sprial on it which causes the coin of the realm eventually to become valueless.
Because we all know it’s a fundamental law of economics that increasing the cost of something has no effect on the demand for that thing.
Just like the Democrats unfunded mandates are intended to tie up State funds to cause the States to be more vulnerable to Federal financial assistance, manipulation, and ultimately control, so is the Democrats minimum wage scheme.
Be minimum wage Democrat instigators Federal, or State it doesn’t matter as it’s always the Democrats, and their intent is to assault capitalism by driving up costs.
The CEPR is a total leftwing, pro-union, anti-business, Occupy Wallstreet, special interest group.
Figures may not lie but liars figure.
So if it doesn't cost jobs, why not make it $100? Why not $1000? (In reality, all a minimum wage does is make it illegal for anyone whose labor is not worth the minimum wage to work.)
Keeping all variables the same but just increasing wages can also be accomplished by increasing prices. However, in a competitive market that may not be possible. For example it might be more efficient to just move production offshore where labor costs are cheaper and keep prices competitive.
Some will argue that businesses just cut profits to pay higher wages. However on average businesses make only about 6% profit on a dollar of sales and much less in many businesses. For example grocery stores operate at a profit level of about 1%. Again liberals will maintain even that even that level of profit is "excessive", but fail to realize that businesses do not work on a break even basis as entrepreneurs will not accept the risks of operating a business with no potential of economic profit.
The bottom line is that increasing wages above reasonable productivbity levels will result in fewer jobs.
All this legislation does is devalue the purchasing power of the dollar and affixes a continuous inflationary sprial on it which causes the coin of the realm eventually to become valueless.
“Study: Minimum wage hikes don’t kill jobs”
However, it DOES kill customers who cannot afford the price hikes.
Progressive think tank talking points, never listen to any think tanks talking points, conservatives either, they both have an agenda and are propagandists. If you really need proof of something go directly to the source where ever that might lead!!!
If I take $500 out of the cash drawer at a supermarket and turn around and buy $500 of groceries with it, the grocer -- or the local economy -- is not better for it.
The fundamental law of economics (i.e. the Law of Demand) states that increasing the cost of something will decrease the QUANTITY DEMANDED of that good; however a change in price does NOT have any effect on the DEMAND for the good. Demand is the relationship between price and quantity demanded. In other words, Demand is the entire line -- or curve -- on the graph rather than just points on the curve. An increase or decrease in demand means the quantity demanded changes at every price. When you change the price, the curve does not shift; you just move to a different point on the curve. Thus, an increasing price does NOT have any effect on the demand for that thing, only an impact on the quantity demanded.
Things that have an effect on the demand for a good (i.e. Determinants of Demand) include:
Changes in Income and Wealth of buyers in the market,
Changes in price or availability of substitute goods,
Changes in price or availability of related goods,
Changes in the number of buyers in the market,
Changes in demographics and consumer tastes, etc.
Changes in these factors impact the quantity demanded at every price and therefore cause the entire demand curve to shift to the left (decrease) or right (increase).
This brief refesher from Basic Economics 101 is brought to you by the letter "D" (for Demand).
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.