Source
The movement for "living wage" laws -- that's a minimum wage, plus insurance and other benefits -- is gaining force with 75 hotly debated campaigns currently underway (see the map). Debates often hang on whether such mandates take jobs away from the poorest and least-skilled workers. Two Stanford researchers are trying to push the discussion further by studying a mathematical model in which both unemployment and profit margins stay steady after implementing a living wage on federal and state levels. The main findings drive home well-known truths: "Raising minimum wages poorly targets the poor," and "virtually as much money goes to the highest-income families as to the lowest." The study is online: "Winners and Losers of Federal and State Minimum Wages."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
btye