Americans Will Only Support Obama’s Minimum Wage Increase If It Doesn’t Harm Jobs

In tonight’s State of the Union Address, President Obama will make his case for requiring businesses to increase how much they pay minimum wage workers from $7.25 to $10.10 per hour while indexing future increases to inflation. He will also announce plans to use an executive order to mandate federal contractors for new government contracts pay their minimum wage workers at least $10.10 per hour.

Public opinion polls indicate that such a proposal at first glance will be popular among the general public. For instance, a Reason-Rupe poll found72 percent of Americans favor raising the minimum wage from $7.25 to $10.10, while 26 percent are opposed. Support also appears to transcend partisanship, with majorities of Republicans (53 percent) as well as independents (72 percent) and Democrats (87 percent) in favor.

However, once Americans consider costs, support for a minimum wage plummets. If raising the minimum wage were to cause some employers to lay-off or hire fewer workers, 57 percent of Americans would oppose a minimum wage hike and 38 percent would favor.

Additionally, if a minimum wage increase were to harm jobs, Democrats would swing 38 points, such that half would then oppose a wage hike. Likewise majorities of independents (53 percent) and Republicans (68 percent) would oppose raising the wage floor.

In both scenarios, the fact that Republicans are more likely to oppose raising the minimum wage is partly driven by their belief that doing so would harm employment. Indeed, a majority (54 percent) of Republicans believe raising the minimum wage would reduce jobs; however, this is a view only shared by 39 percent of Americans overall. Instead 69 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents believe Congress can raise the minimum wage with no adverse effects on employment.

While most Americans support a higher minimum wage, a majority also don’t believe workers should expect minimum wage jobs to be long-term positions. Instead, 61 percent view minimum wage jobs as stepping-stones to help lower skilled or younger workers gain skills. (It’s relevant to note here that some economists have found minimum wage increases actually disincentivize higher education and training). In contrast, a quarter primarily view minimum wage jobs as long-term positions for established workers to support their families.

Partisans also split on this issue, with majorities of Republicans (77 percent) and independents (56 percent) viewing minimum wage jobs as stepping-stones compared to 50 percent of Democrats.

Public attitudes on raising the minimum wage correlates highly with whether Americans accept the premise that government should set a minimum wage in the first place: 73 percent say government should set a minimum wage and 24 percent oppose, nearly identical to the shares supporting a wage increase. Partisan breakdowns are also statistically identical to preferences to raise the minimum wage. This suggests that if Americans accept the initial argument that government should play a role in setting wage floors, then there will be little opposition to raising the floor higher.

Nevertheless, if Americans become convinced that raising the minimum wage will harm employment, they will push back on the initial premise and the proposal to raise the wage.

Read more about Reason-Rupe findings on the minimum wage here.

Nationwide telephone poll conducted Dec 4-8 2013 interviewed 1011 adults on both mobile (506) and landline (505) phones, with a margin of error +/- 3.7%. Princeton Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide Reason-Rupe survey. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full poll results, detailed tables, and methodology found here. Sign up for notifications of new releases of the Reason-Rupe poll here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • DH||

    Edgar looked like he was wearing some sort of suit. Maybe an Edgar suit!

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    And he asked for sugar water.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    That guy has always bugged me.

  • Sevo||

    So when he PROMISES that it won't hurt jobs, why everything will be just fine/

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    He certainly wouldn't lie.

  • datcv||

    I only support a raise in the minimum wage if we set it at $20 an hour and it goes into effect immediately.

    If $10 an hour will make the poor better off, why $20 an hour will make them THAT MUCH BETTER off.

  • Free Society||

    you obviously don't care very much for the poor since you suggest anything less than $100 per hour.

  • Free Society||

    you obviously don't care very much for the poor since you suggest anything less than $100 per hour.

  • PapayaSF||

    23% believe increasing the minimum wage will increase the number of jobs? How, exactly, do they think that works? "Everyone has more money, so they spend more, and that creates jobs?" Jeebus, that's an example of why democracy should stay out of economics.

  • Irish||

    That's exactly what they believe.

    It's why Venezuela's economy is doing SO well after they increased their minimum wage 32.5% last year. After that, all of their economic problems were ended.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • Grand Moff Serious Man||

    "Everyone has more money, so they spend more, and that creates jobs?" Jeebus, that's an example of why democracy should stay out of economics.

    I fully expect Obama to offer that exact explanation for why we need to raise the minimum wage.

    But he'll also throw in an appeal to the great capitalist Henry Ford to "prove" that you need to inflate wages to get the economy going.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • gaijin||

    Fuck working women.

    you dig WWILFs?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What is the minimum wage for a blow-job nowadays?

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    A whiskey sour at the local bar and cab change.

  • gaijin||

    Damn, you must live in a big city paying those prices ;)

  • Bobarian||

    If you go to the right bar you can get one for free by sticking it through a hole in the bathroom stall.

    Minimum wage will kill that.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    We're talking about working women here, Bob, you sexist.

  • Bobarian||

    If you close your eyes and wish hard enough, it is a woman...

    or so I hear.

  • SIV||

    "I fuck bitches that pay my rent

    I don't owe a livin' ass a motherfuckin' cent !"

    -Dolemite

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I take back whatever bad I said about you.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Turned on my stream of FBN only to find LOUUUUU's big ugly mug. It stings every time.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Look, my brother Frank may have some problems, but his stream is guaranteed squirtin' bitches and balloon popping. No "Lous" allowed.

  • ||

    SHADYNASTY!!!

  • datcv||

    It's Sha Dynasty ass hole!

  • Irish||

    I like the 38% of people who'd be in favor of a minimum wage increase even if it raised unemployment.

    You should ask 'would you be in favor of a minimum wage increase if it cost you your job?' It's awfully easy to be in favor of something when you're not the one suffering.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Or don't realize you will be the one suffering.

  • gaijin||

    I like the 38% of people who'd be in favor of a minimum wage increase even if it raised unemployment.

    They are the ones who are already unemployed...and they want company.

  • Sevo||

    Irish|1.28.14 @ 7:29PM|#
    ..."You should ask 'would you be in favor of a minimum wage increase if it cost you your job?' It's awfully easy to be in favor of something when you're not the one suffering."

    Those are the people who vote for tax increases and are amazed when THEIR taxes go up.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    Well, thats why they aren't in favor of their taxes going up. They're in favor of the rich's taxes going up.

  • Sevo||

    You bet! Hey, if someone's gotta lose a job for me to make more money, I'm glad it's happening to Sam over there!
    You tell 'em, Obo! I'm behind ya 45% or so!

  • Irish||

    Progressives should be required to look at the situation in Venezuela every time they argue that their economic policies work.

    Yesterday President Nicolas Maduro announced a new minimum wage increase of 10%, to be applied as of this month.

    The measure would bring wages above inflation levels. Inflation in 2013 was 56.2%, while minimum wage increases last year totalled 45%, with 20% applied in May, 10% in September, and 10% in November. With January’s increase, the minimum wage has now increased by 59% between May 2013 and January 2014.

    Huh. I wonder if that massive inflation might be connected to the 45% increase in the minimum wage last year. It's almost like jacking up the price of labor results in prices skyrocketing.

    Also, Venezuela's 56.2% inflation must be impossible since Krugman assured me that the only places inflation has ever been a problem were Weimar Germany and Zimbabwe.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Progressives should be required to look at the situation in Venezuela every time they argue that their economic policies work

    Bu...But the evil gringo has kept Venezuela from real socialism.

  • Irish||

    Correct!

    The increase “brings us above the criminal inflation brought about by the economic war”, Maduro said.

    I blame Bush.

  • ||

    Yeah, I heard that saboteurs are waging a war on the economy in Venezuela and that Maduro is hot on their trail.

  • gaijin||

    Progressives should be required to look at the situation live in Venezuela

    Fixed

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    WHY DO THEY GET THE HOT CALLIPYGOUS LATINAS?

  • Irish||

    Did you read the article? The inflation rate is increasing faster than the increase in minimum wage. That means the POOR are losing their earning power.

    It's hurting the poor, moron. The rich already left Venezuela.

  • Sevo||

    "The rich already left Venezuela."
    If they didn't, their money is already in the hands of cousin Jose' in Miami.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    What's next, you'll argue for the abolition of public schools?

    Yes. Why?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    This is redistribution, that is the fucking goal, transfer money from the rich to the less rich progressive constituency.

    FIFY

  • Irish||

    Reductio ad absurdum. What's next, you'll argue for the abolition of public schools?

    Yes.

    At the link you'll find an impressive example of Sweden's school choice program, a program we would do well to copy.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    I have disabled Ghostery on Reason to help keep their ad revenue flowing.. but fuck it slows down my computer.

    On another note, my roommate asked if I was going to watch the SOTU. I told him I don't know if I could handle that hour long avalanche of bullshit, as a joke (but not really). He tells me Obama could say anything and he would listen. He loves the guy, thinks he's the greatest.

    Now this guy is Canadian and lives in Canada so doesn't really get to feel the effects of Obama and probably couldn't tell me one Obama policy (and my roommate's probably not that intelligent, politically or economically) but it just blows me away when I hear it directly from peoples mouths that they love the guy. Sad really.

  • Sevo||

    Any idea why the roomie thinks so?

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    He's just. so. well spoken. You know, for one of his people.

  • Bobarian||

    Your roommate is Joe Biden?

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Not really, I just assume it is a cult of personality thing. Plus, like he shot hoops once and my roommate loves basketball.

  • Sevo||

    I was curious if the roomie could actually point to something he did and make that the centerpiece of the view.
    Bush got some back pats for the damn war, but by the time Obo showed up, that was a dead issue.
    O-care? Naah. Giving half ownership of GM to the UAW? Solyndra? The IRS? What?

  • paranoid android||

    Because he's a credit to his ra---ohh, almost walked right into that one.

  • Irish||

    He's the most overrated speaker in the history of the human race. He always makes me think of Mencken's epic attack on Warren Harding called Gamalielese.

    Setting aside a college professor or two and half a dozen dipsomaniacal newspaper reporters, he takes the first place in my Valhalla of literati. That is to say, he writes the worst English I have even encountered. It reminds me of a string of wet sponges; it reminds me of tattered washing on the line; it reminds me of stale bean-soup, of college yells, of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights. It is so bad that a sort of grandeur creeps into it. It drags itself out of the dark abysm (I was about to write abscess!) of pish, and crawls insanely up the topmost pinnacle of posh. It is rumble and bumble. It is flap and doodle. It is balder and dash.

    (Snip)

    That is to say, the thing is always a stump speech; it is conceived as a stump speech and written as a stump speech. More, it is a stump speech addressed to the sort of audience that the speaker has been used to all of his life, to wit, an audience of small town yokels, of low political serfs, or morons scarcely able to understand a word of more than two syllables, and wholly able to pursue a logical idea for more than two centimeters.

    1/2

  • Irish||

    Such imbeciles do not want ideas—that is, new ideas, ideas that are unfamiliar, ideas that challenge their attention. What they want is simply a gaudy series of platitudes, of sonorous nonsense driven home with gestures. As I say, they can’t understand many words of more than two syllables, but that is not saying that they do not esteem such words. On the contrary, they like them and demand them. The roll of incomprehensible polysyllables enchants them. They like phrases which thunder like salvos of artillery. Let that thunder sound, and they take all the rest on trust. If a sentence begins furiously and then peters out into fatuity, they are still satisfied. If a phrase has a punch in it, they do not ask that it also have a meaning. If a word slips off the tongue like a ship going down the ways, they are content and applaud it and wait for the next.

    Mencken was talking about Baptist yokels in the 1920's South, but it applies equally well to the puritanical morons that make up the progressive left.

  • PapayaSF||

    I'm almost done with A Mencken Crestomathy. A wonderful writer. I've cracked up my girlfriend by reading her some excerpts.

  • ||

    Wow.

    I don't know anyone who likes the guy anymore.
    All of the people who used to defend him to me are silent these days.

    A person would have to be Tony-level stupid to still love the POS.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    I don't put much stock in his intelligence or his knowledge of anything political and definitely not economical.

  • ||

    Canadians blow.

    Except me of course and a couple of other Canuckeasoners.

  • Lord at War||

    RJF-

    Can I ask you to suck a little bit more?

    Your atmosphere has recently invaded central Ohio.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    yawn

  • Irish||

    No it wouldn't. It would result in an awful lot of people in the ghetto being incapable of getting a job because their labor isn't worth enough. They would then go on the dole their entire lives.

    It would solidify the ghetto and insure that people stay there their whole lives.

    If it didn't result in unemployment, it would result in inflation like it has in Venezuela. Price inflation would rob the poor of any additional earning power given to them by the wage increase, so they would have no more buying power than they did before.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No it wouldn't. It would result in an awful lot of people in the ghetto being incapable of getting a job because their labor isn't worth enough. They would then go on the dole their entire lives.

    That's a good point. Remember that in many states the total income you can earn in welfare benefits is higher than one can earn in a job at minimum wage. I may not subscribe to rational actor theory, but people aren't that irrational.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    A lot of ghetto people

    Your respect for these people is just...just shining through with every letter that you type.

    Ghetto people...*shakes head* Nigga please!

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Are people going to suddenly stop going to McDonald's if the price of a burger increases by twenty cents?

    The logical failing here is great. You do realize that the people making minimum wage must also buy this now more expensive food. So, either they're buying power doesn't change because the price of everything increases to match the increase cost to operate a business with a higher minimum wage (inflation), OR these businesses cut staff to keep their prices the same, and you just end up reducing the number of jobs available to people with no skills.

  • Irish||

    You do realize that the people making minimum wage must also buy this now more expensive food.

    They never realize this. It reminds me of the other day when American (who may be the person we're arguing with) tried to claim that allowing immigration is bad because it might lower prices, but those low prices only help 'consumers' and harm 'laborers.'

    You know, because consumers and laborers are different people. It's not like everyone on Earth is both a laborer and a consumer. That would be insanity!

  • Sevo||

    Don't think this is Merkin.
    Stupidity level is right there, but not enough racism.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    I suspected it was American from the first post. But I'm still not sure, I'm sure he'll give us a tell in the next few posts though.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I suspected it was American from the first post

    It's so hard to tell international socialism from national socialism at first glance.

  • Sevo||

    "That isn't an option for most businesses."
    You are testing the limits of DUM.
    Ever hear of automation?

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:56PM|#
    "I have heard of the Jetsons. But I'm aware that it's a TV show."
    I'm sure your mom thought that was clever.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Oh I get it now. Equality in poverty is your goal.

  • Bobarian||

    He's fuckin' Robin Hood!

  • Sevo||

    "This whole idea of "worth" is flawed."
    I would guess in your case, that's true. Your mom probably thought you were "worth" something.

    "A lot of ghetto people do jobs that society couldn't function without, scrubbing floors and flipping burgers."
    Yes, and they get paid what those jobs sell for; i.e. what they are worth.

  • Irish||

    No one here has argued that a worker makes exactly the amount of wealth he produces. If that were the case, profit would not exist. Labor is simply one of many inputs.

    That said, your argument is moronic.

    This is an idiotic idea because the "wealth" that he can produce is based on bargaining power, it bears little connection to "intrinsic value."

    Really. So if McDonald's makes 30 cents on every burger and you raise the price of labor so that labor costs are now 40 cents higher per burger...what would happen? Would McDonald's run at an eternal loss?

    No. They would either close stores that were no longer profitable and automate (unemployment) or raise prices to make up for increased labor costs (price inflation.) In both those cases, the poor are no better off. In the first case, many of them are unemployed who were not unemployed before and in the second case the increase in wage gets eaten up by higher prices.

    If you want to keep arguing with the voices in your head though, I guess that's cool.

  • Sevo||

    First, no, I'm not going to waste 8 minutes listening to brain-dead 'explanations'.
    You are obviously totally ignorant as to how businesses function, as Irish makes clear below.
    Suffice to say those who put up the money expect to make money from that, the desires of ignorant assholes be damned.
    So any increase in costs also gets an increase in the markup to cover the other functions of running a business and to deliver the PROFIT.
    Now, if you increase my costs $10, I will sell the product at $17 more to make my PROFIT. Or I will go out of business and screw you and everyone else who hopes I work for free.

  • Sevo||

    'Scuse me; $10.70, not $17.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:55PM|#
    "Yes, the value of capital will decline. THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT."
    No, the value of capital will not decline.
    YOU'RE A FUCKING IDJIT!

  • MJGreen||

    This is an idiotic idea because the "wealth" that he can produce is based on bargaining power, it bears little connection to "intrinsic value."

    I can assure you, the woman that gave me an Americano at Starbucks the other day can bargain far better than me, yet I make at least $10,000 more a year than her.

  • Sevo||

    ..."Are people going to suddenly stop going to McDonald's if the price of a burger increases by twenty cents?"...

    When your profits are 7%, it doesn't take a lot of people not buying your product before you go under.

  • Bobarian||

    If you increase labor costs by 20%, which in a restaurant is about half your cost, and are only make 7% profit, you are now making -3% profit. Also your suppliers cost go up by that same 10-20%, so then you get another 20% hit to the other half of the ledger and are at -13%.

    So you raise your prices by ~22% just to get back to where you were. Inflation starts to roll.

    Death spiral ensues.

    You Dad gets punched in the belly by a looter while trying to get a can of beans.

  • Sevo||

    "So you raise your prices by ~22% just to get back to where you were. Inflation starts to roll."
    Add an additional 7%, because if you don't, I'll have it made in China to get my return.

  • Bobarian||

    7% of 20% is the ~2% (rounded up)

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Raising the minimum wage would allow the ghetto workers(and yes, some people in the ghetto work) to move into the middle class neighborhood.

    Property values remain static in your fever dream?

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    What about the people making right now what the new minimum wage would be changed to?

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    Source? Or is this just your "gut" feeling?

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:03PM|#
    "They might experience upward momentum in their wage, as they could take one of the easier, now equal wage jobs and thus increase their bargaining power, but at the end of the day it would still be closer to the ghetto than before."
    That makes no sense at all.

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    They'll be more than happy to be make the same minimum wage as the person who until yesterday was not capable of commanding.

  • ||

    Who dresses you Watley?

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 7:57PM|#
    "The purchasing power of the ghetto will be closer to the purchasing power of the middle class."

    False. Prices would rise, PP would remain equal.
    You're not real bright.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:26PM|#
    "Again, there's that shit about "intrinsic value" again, it's bullshit. Supply and demand, that's the determinant of price."

    There's that stupid shit about how prices would remain equal while income rises again, it's bullshit.
    You're an ignoramus; go away.

  • General Butt Naked||

    You dazzle me with your economic analysis. I would much like to subscribe to your newsletter.

  • Bobarian||

    Do you already own a tin-foil hat?

    You can't subscribe without one.

  • Sevo||

    They're on Aisle 6, but they are made by people on the new higher minimum wage, so no one can afford them.

  • gaijin||

    If one thing is more expensive than another thing, what can you deduce about it? People would rather have the expensive thing than the less expensive thing.

    What can I deduce from this statement? That you have a simplistic view of how things are priced.

  • Sevo||

    "That is why white conservatives oppose minimum wage increases."

    WHAT?!
    Since people pay more for what they prefer, that's the reason some people oppose a minimum wage!?
    Get outa here. Gotta be a joke.

  • ||

    White conservatives oppose it but black conservatives do not?

    So it is true then that every everything is about race. Amazing.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Haven't you heard? Thomas Sowell came out today and stated I fucking love the minimum wage now!

    It's true.

  • PapayaSF||

    This person is starting to sound like Tony.

    Your core error (well, one of them) is to think the government can just decree an increased price for unskilled labor, and that nothing bad will happen. But bad things will happen. Basic supply and demand tells you that raising the cost of something reduces demand for it. Basic common sense will tell you that an employer will pay no more for an employee than he thinks that employee is worth.

    What a $10.10 minimum wage does is say: "Nobody whose labor is worth less than $10.10 is allowed to have a legal job."

    And indeed, the original Progressive push for a minimum wage was racist, sexist, and eugenic. It was intended to disemploy blacks and the handicapped, so that they couldn't afford to have children, and disemploy white women so that they would stay home and have babies.

  • Sevo||

    Papaya, keep scrolling down. The imbecile known as Watley has invented the econ perpetual motion machine!
    I'm tired of pointing out the errors; there's only so much time.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    The problem is that labor's "worth" is based on supply and demand.

    lol - ok - so what is the answer to defining labor's "worth" then?

    Unicorns and fairies?

    Or our abundantly and infinitely rational and morally upstanding politicians?

    What's that? You say politicians aren't all that great and that unicorns and fairies don't exist?

    Surely ye jest!

  • Boisfeuras||

    Look at middle class neighborhoods. Look at ghetto neighborhoods...If one thing is more expensive than another thing, what can you deduce about it?

    People who live on other people's money don't give a shit about their neighborhoods?

  • ||

    I match that 'yawn' and raise you a 'sigh.'

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Of course I'd support a minimum wage hike if it didn't hurt jobs, just like I'd be glad to have a free pony if it didn't need food and never made a mess.

  • New West Republic||

    There's always another free government pony when that one starves to death in its own filth.

  • XM||

    Obama is a kind of a man who likes to cover all his bases. He knows most people earn above minimum wage. Most businesses already pay around 10 bucks an hours (part time, probably), they're not likely to complain right away. Lots of businesses engage in the shadow economy.

    People who work in retail, fast food and malls are already in Obama's camp. They're not likely switch sides even if their hours are cut.

    American workers need HOURS, not increase in federal minimum wage that won't increase their current salary. But there was some sort of healthcare mandate that discouraged employers from hiring full time workers. What was it.....

  • Robert||

    I suspect most people look at this the way my father did. He figured practically all employers made enough profit that they could afford to pay low-wage employees a little more. Not a lot more, not like double, that'd be absurd, but a significant raise. If it were mandated by law, what are they going to do? "They can't go out of business," he said, by which he meant they wouldn't just close up shop, because there'd still be money to be made (plus they had an investment that might not be worth much to liquidate). He also apparently assumed the work couldn't economically be restructured to require fewer employees, so people who'd been getting less than the new minimum would simply get a raise, no jobs lost. It was just a matter of distributing more of the gains from business to employees rather than employers, and that employees were not in good position to bargain for such a deal unless mandated by law. He said that without any minimum wage laws, the pay many people now get would drop to "coolie wages", apparently because employers could get away with that if unfettered bargaining were allowed.

  • gaijin||

    He also apparently assumed the work couldn't economically be restructured to require fewer employees, so people who'd been getting less than the new minimum would simply get a raise, no jobs lost.

    In the modern world, there are alternatives that may not have been as readily available to the business owner of yesteryear. For example, the closer you price human labor to robot labor, the easier it is for the business to replace one with the other. Watch as retail self checkout kiosks expand to stores that aren't spelled Walmart or Home Depot.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    He said that without any minimum wage laws, the pay many people now get would drop to "coolie wages", apparently because employers could get away with that if unfettered bargaining were allowed.

    That's exactly what happened, because the minimum wage hikes forced these businesses to close up shop and move to where there are actual "coolies"...you know, China.

  • gaijin||

    Who says they must be allowed to do that?

    haha! So you favor capital controls and centrally planned economies. We get it. you'd like to put a gun to people's heads to get them to do what you just know if the right thing for everyone. Your work here is done.

  • Irish||

    So you favor capital controls and centrally planned economies.

    I know. He's now arguing that we should eliminate the free movement of capital. Clearly creating artificial inefficiency, driving up the price of every good, and destroying our capacity to buy and sell internationally is an ingenious move.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Not even that. He's saying that we should enserf people. That is, we cannot leave the King's land without permission.

  • Irish||

    Yes, tariff wars worked astoundingly well in the Great Depression.

    You're also talking about driving up the price of goods for all American consumers...which, again, would make any increase in wages get eaten by increased prices.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:58PM|#
    "The totally crashed the economy during Japan's rise."

    The sky horizon green bent stuff, too!

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:30PM|#
    "I want to raise tariffs. A far cry from "centrally planned economies,""
    No, it is only a step or two away.

    "but I have heard libertarians claim the public schools are akin to Bolshevism."
    Well, you're an idiot, so you may have voices in your head.

  • Irish||

    Who says they must be allowed to do that?

    Yay! Autarky for everyone! You realize the only way to do this would be to effectively eliminate international trade. Otherwise people can move capital from one country to another.

    Are you arguing in favor of eliminating international trade?

    You must also consider the fact that employers would also pass their costs on to their consumers.

    You don't seem to be following your own argument. Earlier you ignored the increased costs that would occur due to minimum wage increases, but now we're the ones who aren't taking into account costs getting passed on?

    It's like you have a lobotomy that makes it impossible for you to remember the argument you were making ten minutes ago.

  • Irish||

    Your entire argument is based on the theory that prices don't rise. If prices rise, then an increase in minimum wage is meaningless because it gets eaten by price inflation.

    That's what happened in Venezuela. Inflation is rising too quickly for wages to keep up so the poor are actually made worse off.

  • Sevo||

    "It gets partially "eaten" by price inflation"
    It gets eaten and then some as capital demands the additional 7%

    "capital will also take a hit."
    Capital only takes a hit long after labor does; it's fungible and fugitive.

  • Michael S. Langston||

    I understand Russia privatized it's industry and it was in the immediate sense a disaster.

    Sorry, but you do not understand. I think what you meant to say was "I read somewhere" because what took place in Russia was not privatization, but corrupt political rent seeking.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:12PM|#
    "Who says they must be allowed to do that?"

    I do. Fuck off, slaver.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Well, animal welfare laws tend to be overzealous, yes.

  • Irish||

    Collie labor

    Do you mean 'Coolie labor?' Because that's pretty fucking racist if you're using that term unironically.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    No, Robert's father did, actually. Do you have short-term memory problems or something?

  • Irish||

    Both HM and Robert were referring to Robert's father using racist terminology. Admittedly, at the time it probably wasn't thought to be racist.

    You don't seem to be using the term ironically, American.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    The great irony is that when my East Indian ancestors were brought to island of Trinidad, that's what they were called, "coolies", and that's the sort of hard, bone-crushing labor they did until they built up their fortunes to a quite comfortable level.

    So, yes, I can employ that fucking word at my own fucking pleasure, you fucking piece of shit.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:32PM|#
    "Poor me, I'm not aloud to build a factory on Collie labor. I'm a "slave!""

    Poor you! You have to work for what you're worth, and from what your posting, I'd say the existing minimum wage is easily twice that.
    Fuck off, slaver.

  • Robert||

    The video, with its original sound track, did overlook the fact pointed out by the superposed commentary, that a mandated increase in wages of floor sweepers would not diminish the number of floor sweepers needed, absent a restructuring of the operation, which may or may not be feasible. And it is true that assigning the value of many jobs on the basis of their supposed contribution to proceeds (which is actually a version of the labor theory of value) is not just difficult (as the commentary said), but a vain effort.

    The reason the floor sweeper doesn't make much money is simple: Sweeping floors is easy. Therefore the potential quantity supplied of floor sweepers is huge compared to other jobs. You've got to pay people a lot more if you want them to do something harder, especially if it takes them a long time to learn how. Applying a minimum wage of triple the going rate for floor sweepers would misallocate labor horribly, as people would be discouraged from entering into more difficult lines of work, which would then pay no more than floor sweeping.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 9:04PM|#
    "It may be easy, but it also sucks"

    Yeah, poor Watley. Did your masters in victim studies not pay off? Did they tell you to clean the damn toilets?
    Fuck off, slaver.

  • Robert||

    Workers who make wages that are at the new minimum wage would be able to command a greater price for their labor because they now have the option of sweeping the floor.


    Why? Would there be some increase in quantity of floor sweeping demanded?

  • Francisco d Anconia||

    That may have been the most economically ignorant video I've ever watched. Mendacious cock, every word.

  • ||

    Ah, THERE IT IS!

    Follow your comment (about allowing 'them' to do so) to its logical end, sir.

  • Sevo||

    ""They can't go out of business," he said,"

    Tell that to, oh, Penn Central. GM. IBM got real close.
    And those are only the big ones; small ones go quickly.

  • Palin's Buttplug||

    GOP Abandons Principle With Subsidy-Filled Farm Bill

    The $1 trillion bill that will be voted on this week is another big pail of slop. It includes subsidies for corn, cotton, wool, sugar, peanuts, dairy farmers, catfish farms, Christmas tree growers and even farmers' markets. And it's a setback on nearly every policy front.

    Taxpayers will still fund about half the premium costs of crop insurance. We're steadily moving away from the GOP vision of freedom to farm with farmers producing for the market, not for the government.

    Oh, and by the way, all of this is happening at a time when farm incomes and the value of farmland have never been higher. The USDA reports that net farm income for 2013 was about $130 billion, or 15% above last year. Farmers are wealthier and earn more than the average American.

    This is a bill that transfers $1 trillion from taxpayers to the politically powerful in Washington. That isn't fairness, it is fraud. And both parties are in on the heist.

    Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/ibd-.....z2rkFbkuWM
    Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

  • Sevo||

    Palin's Buttplug|1.28.14 @ 8:03PM|#
    "GOP Abandons Principle With Subsidy-Filled Farm Bill"

    Yeah, dipshit, and they passed it over the strong objections of the Ds, right?
    Go fuck your daddy; your cheerleading is a tired act.

  • General Butt Naked||

    It's like you're a scientist among troglodytes. Why can't these people just get it?

    Especially this "mulatto" person. We're trying to help your people, but you let your misguided ideology keep them enchained as wage slaves.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    We're trying to help your people

    What do you mean, you people?

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:39PM|#
    "I am simply telling the truth."
    You're an ignoramus with fantasies.

  • Irish||

    Hi, American!

  • Sevo||

    I don't think so; even DUMMER than Merkin, but less racism. We'll see if the posts disappear.

  • Irish||

    It's American.

    certainly it would hurt the whites who live there.
  • Heroic Mulatto||

    I never said I was trying to "help" Blacks, and I don't think having them move into middle class neighborhoods would be much help to them, certainly it would hurt the whites who live there.

    And....we're off! About 40 minutes in before the mask slips.

    Keep trying, you'll make an hour one day!

  • Irish||

    They don't realize that the value of labor, and the corresponding value of capital, isn't static.

    This is hilarious given that you just argued that there's static pricing of 'ghetto' vs. 'middle class' housing.

    Suppose a plague went through the nation, killing half of the workers, but leaving nearly all the capital intact. According to the flawed "logic" of some commentors here, in the aftermath of the plague there would be no redistribution of wealth from capital to labor. What they do is they change one variable but leave all others constant.

    This is totally different from your argument about minimum wage. This is more analogous to an increase in the number of laborers due to immigration.

    Unless you plan on murdering half of the workers in America, I'm not sure what this has to do with a minimum wage increase.

  • Sevo||

    Your supposed 'thoughts' are, oh, 4th grade level.
    "The issue here is the simple fact that prices are a function of supply and demand."
    Yes, and if you increase the supply of money, the prices of goods increases along with it. You may have heard of this phenomenon; it's called "inflation".

    "If half the laborers died, capital would have NO CHOICE but to pay them more and thus transfer more of the wealth to them."
    Wrong; You presume demand for "labor" is constant. It's not. That capital may go in to buying machines.
    You're an ignoramus; go away.

  • sarcasmic||

    That capital may go in to buying machines.

    To be fair, it takes labor to make the machines.

  • Sevo||

    Absolutely true, but that automated loom took 'way less labor than the weavers used to put in producing cloth.
    And the unskilled didn't get the job of making the loom.

  • sarcasmic||

    Gotcha.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 9:17PM|#
    "They can replace half the labor force with machines?"
    Yes, you ignoramus, the auto business cut labor by more than 70% with robots.

  • ||

    If there's anybody not thinking in the abstract, it's you.

    I'm no economist but I do run a business and my experience tells me it's the opposite of what you say.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:09PM|#
    "Suppose a plague went through the nation, killing half of the workers, but leaving nearly all the capital intact."

    Suppose you grow a brain cell, asshole. I don't play 'hypotheticals',

  • sarcasmic||

    I've read that a few times and now my head hurts.

    According to the flawed "logic" of some commentors here, in the aftermath of the plague there would be no redistribution of wealth from capital to labor.

    What the fuck does that mean? Capital is wealth. How can wealth transfer wealth?

    They claim that jobs would be lost because the value of the labor is below the increased minimum wage.

    If half the labor force was lost, I doubt there would be much effort spent in enforcing the minimum wage. So that's a non-sequitor.

    They don't realize that the value of labor, and the corresponding value of capital, isn't static.

    Value is subjective, so that sentence makes no sense.

  • Irish||

    No, he's right. If there was a massive die off among American workers, the value of labor would rise because the supply of labor collapsed. It happened after the Black Plague.

    The question is whether or not the rise in costs would offset the increase in wages. Far less would be produced so it's difficult to tell.

  • Sevo||

    Irish|1.28.14 @ 8:26PM|#
    "No, he's right. If there was a massive die off among American workers, the value of labor would rise because the supply of labor collapsed. It happened after the Black Plague."

    Not sure that condition would still obtain.
    At the time of the Plague, most jobs were low-skill efforts and you could plug Sam in when Joe kicked off.
    Try that now, even with, say a crane operator at a construction site.
    For the skilled, wages would skyrocket. for the non-skilled, not so much.

  • Irish||

    That's true. A lot of those jobs would probably just get automated if low-skilled workers asked for too much money.

    Which, of course, is another think Watley is completely ignoring. Here's an article about potentially making McDonalds and other restaurants completely automated.

    So would these companies just not automate if the cost of labor increased substantially?

  • sarcasmic||

    A lot of those jobs would probably just get automated if low-skilled workers asked for too much money.

    If the labor force was halved, who would do the labor for the automation?

    Speaking of automation, I printed this out and put it on the wall of my cubicle at work because it's so true.

  • Sevo||

    "Speaking of automation, I printed this out and put it on the wall of my cubicle at work because it's so true."

    Not universally true.
    I've done simple spread sheets that cut my labor by tons calcing various mechanical properties and business conditions.

  • sarcasmic||

    I've done simple spread sheets that cut my labor by tons calcing various mechanical properties and business conditions.

    I like xkcd because as a software developer I get a lot of his jokes. I'm sure there's humor around your profession that I wouldn't get.

  • Sevo||

    "I like xkcd because as a software developer I get a lot of his jokes. I'm sure there's humor around your profession that I wouldn't get."
    Got it.

  • Bobarian||

    I have spent 8 hours automating a task I could have hand jammed in 2.

    If I have to do the task at least 4 times then 'I'm a winner!'.

    But sometimes I'm a sad panda, because that first answer changes the question, and I hand jam the 2nd one.

    This is the one the Boss keeps asking for.

  • sarcasmic||

    the value of labor would rise because the supply of labor collapsed

    He went through all that convoluted nonsense to attempt to explain supply and demand?

    Looks to me like he gets off on trying to unnecessarily complicate things in an effort to appear intelligent.

    It didn't work.

  • sarcasmic||

    Now that I think about it, that's not fair. Maybe that word salad was an attempt to coalesce a thought into something more concise, like this.

  • sarcasmic||

    Wealth is not money and money is not wealth.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:47PM|#
    ..."You are comparatively intelligent for someone on here."...

    As if someone abysmally ignorant would know.
    Fuck off, slaver.

  • sarcasmic||

    Entropy applies to physics, not economics.

    Also, Tony under a new name, money is not wealth and wealth is not money.

  • sarcasmic||

    Your analogy fails because persons are not atoms. Entropy applies to atoms, but individuals don't equalize wealth (or is it money or is it wealth do you know the difference?) by proximity interation. That's a pretty fucking stupid analogy.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 9:37PM|#
    "Capital" is the capitalists jut like "labor" is the laborers."

    No, asshole, it isn't. Capital is fungible and fugitive. Labor ain't.
    That's the reason smart people prefer to deal with capital and idjits like you get paid nothing.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 9:08PM|#
    "It's called an analogy, dumbass. Tony is another type of dumbass."

    Dumbass, your analogy isn't, dumbass.

  • ||

    OK, this guy is a master. I think my brain just collapsed in on itself. A+ trolling.

  • sarcasmic||

    You're not stoned enough, Epi. Go burn another one.

    Fuck it. I'm taking my own advice.

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 8:44PM|#
    "How can heat be transferred from a hot object to a cold object?"

    Oh, NOOOO!
    'See, the tide comes in and the tide goes out and you can't explain that, hunh?!?!?!'

  • Sevo||

    Watley|1.28.14 @ 9:15PM|#
    "These idiots seem to think pointing out the fact that a minimum wage increase would increase prices is somehow an argument against the minimum wage. THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT. Consumers will have to pay more."

    So, if the wage is raised and the price is also, there was no reason to raise the wage, because you're back where you began with the loss of changing all the numbers, Got that?
    Do you think that the wage earners are somehow not the consumers, FUCKING IDIOT?

  • Redmanfms||

    No one gains money.

    Then what's the point of raising the minimum wage?

  • Sevo||

    It employs accountants to move decimals! And imbeciles like Merkin think that broken windows make wealth!

  • Sevo||

    Oh, and:
    "And the reason the middle class opposes it is because they want to keep the Blacks out of their communities. This is motivated by racist tendencies which are present in most white people. In Europe, middle class workers have less objection to having the poor living among them(this may change as immigration increases), and that is why that region is more left-wing than America."
    What a pile of shit.

  • Calidissident||

    Yeah, minimum wage laws really help low-income blacks. It's not like there isn't a bundle of evidence suggesting that it contributes to high unemployment in this demographic, particularly among young black men.

  • Calidissident||

    "And what is it about low-skilled, young Black men that it affects them so much more than it affects low-skilled white men?"

    There are more of them (of course, to you, the only possible reason for this is that blacks inherently have lower intelligence)? And it affects low-skilled white men too. The effect of the minimum wage on teenage unemployment, for all races, is also well-documented.

  • Redmanfms||

    Lord Voldemort???

  • Calidissident||

    Hi American

  • Robert||

    If you just wanted to increase the proportion of compensation going to low wage earners, minimum wages would be a very inefficient way of accomplishing that. Something like the Earned Income Tax Credit would be more to the point.

  • Sevo||

    Robert,
    Dunno if you are familiar with this particular vermin, but Merkin is a slimy racist and shows up here from time to time until the moderator catches him again and tosses his ass.
    Regardless of how any discussion starts, it ends with 'those damn black people mumble, mumble!'

  • cheap soccer jerseys||

    So this article is written to tell me to support Obama without any doubt?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement