Minimum Wage

CBO Says $15 Federal Minimum Wage Will Cost 1.3 Million Jobs

The Congressional Budget Office says 17 million workers will see higher paychecks, but the poorest and least skilled are likely to be left out.

|

Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would cost an estimated 1.3 jobs but would also lift more workers above the poverty line, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates in a report released Monday.

The current federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, though most states have minimum wage laws requiring higher pay. Earlier this year, House Democrats introduced a bill to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour by 2025, and most Democrats in the 2020 presidential field have endorsed that plan. That plan builds on an unsuccessful Obama-era effort to set the federal minimum wage at $10.10 per hour.

If implemented by 2025, the CBO estimates, the $15 federal minimum wage would boost paychecks for 17 million workers who would otherwise earn less than $15 per hour. About 10 million workers who now earn about $15 an hour might see their paychecks increase slightly as well. The trade-off would be 1.3 million more people out of work. Those who lose their jobs (or are unable to find them in the first place) are likely to be lower-income workers, unskilled workers, and those with little work experience.

The CBO also ran projections for smaller minimum wage increases. If Congress hiked the minimum wage to $12 per hour by 2025, about 5 million workers would benefit from bigger paychecks and about 300,000 jobs would be lost. An increase to $10 per hour would benefit only 1.5 million workers and would have a negligible effect on employment levels (largely because 15 states already have minimum wages set at or above that level).

"For most low-wage workers, earnings and family income would increase, which would lift some families out of poverty. But other low-wage workers would become jobless, and their family income would fall—in some cases, below the poverty threshold," the CBO concludes.

Democratic presidential candidates and others on the left will probably try to use the report to bolster the case for a higher minimum wage, claiming that the benefits outweigh the costs. The Employment Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank, is already claiming the CBO "substantially overstates the costs" associated with higher wage mandates.

But it's important to remember that any negative consequences—regardless of what they might be—will fall most heavily on workers with fewer skills or little experience. Someone who has a hard time finding a job that pays $8 an hour will be completely out of luck if employers are required to hire only workers who are worth $15 an hour.

It's also important to remember that low-wage workers aren't always from low-income families. Think of teenagers working summer jobs, for example, or students working part-time while they pursue higher education. In other words, some of the beneficiaries of higher minimum wages aren't really what is traditionally thought of as "poor"—and the truly needy are more likely to lose out on entry-level jobs.

Having the feds set a minimum wage rate introduces additional problems. The law's consequences in poorer, rural states will not be the same as its consequences in places with a higher cost of living. In other words, a $15 minimum wage will do more damage in Mississippi than in New York City. Forcing all American businesses to pay the same minimum wages makes little sense.

State lawmakers will make mistakes too, of course—California's $15 per hour minimum wage means vastly different things depending on whether you live in Los Angeles or the poorer, rural counties of the state's Central Valley, where unemployment is already high.

Eighteen states began 2019 with higher minimum wages than they had at the start of 2018, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which tracks state-level policies. Eight of those states automatically increase their minimum wages to track with the cost of living, while 10 others adopted increases because of specific legislation or ballot initiatives. Four other states have approved minimum wage increases during 2019.

NEXT: Is Facial Recognition the New Fingerprinting—or Something Much Worse?

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.

  1. Worker: “I want a raise, I think I am worth more money”
    Boss: “Well, I really would like to pay you what you are worth, but the minimum wage law prevents that”

    1. Worker: “I want a raise, I think I am worth more money.”
      Boss: “Well, I don’t think you are worth more money and the law prevents me from paying you less money, which is what I think you’re worth!”

  2. One of the few issues on which I disagree with my progressive friends is the minimum wage. Most of them want to raise it, while I want it abolished.

    As a left-libertarian, I know the key to a strong economy is unlimited immigration and no minimum wage. Fortunately the Democratic Party is moving toward the Koch / Reason position on the former. Let’s hope they eventually see things our way on the latter.

    1. What about welfare laws, wise OBL? Would you sacrifice handouts in exchange for unlimited immigration? I think many here would be okay with that, myself included.

      Inquiring minds want to know.

      1. Sounds good to me, Cornholer.

  3. >>>The trade-off would be 1.3 million more people out of work.

    not trade-off so much as non-starter.

    1. To a democrat, that 1.3 million more people dependent on their progressive masters for the crumbs offered that will allow the table to survive.

    2. AND the worst effects will occur in rural and depressed areas that mostly vote Republican.

      But I don’t believe that only 1.3 million jobs would be lost. That’s only a third of the jobs in the fast food industry alone – and McDonalds and the other large companies would have started developing automated sales kiosks, automatic burger fryers, and other ways to slash their need for low-skilled workers as soon as they realized that politicians were serious about $15/hour. (Worse, chances are many of those jobs will be gone even if this is never actually implemented outside of a few cities. The most expensive part of such projects is perfecting the technology, so once it’s ready to deploy, it’s likely to make sense to use it to replace even $8/hour workers.) Then, how many jobs can casual dining restaurants replace with the same technology? How much could Walmart cut out of 2.3 million jobs? And all the other stores?

      Then there’s the electronics assembly plant where I worked until I retired this year, and hundreds of plants like it. Half of the employees are paid $11 per hour, everything possible has been automated, and it’s running on a very thin margin. At $15/hour, it’s out of business, all jobs except a few salespersons transferred to its Mexican plant and to competitors in the Asian rim – including the $75K/year engineering jobs like mine, the managers, QA inspectors, and office staff.

      The only good thing about this proposal: if the insane left wing of the Democratic Party gains control in 2020 and passes this, they’ll lose both houses of Congress in 2022, the Presidency in 2024, and Republicans will be in power for so long, they might even stop thinking of themselves as the minority party and start really rolling back regulations and even delete some government departments.

  4. Only 1.3 million people have to be sacrificed? We’ll never catch up to Stalin at this rate!

    /prog logic.

    1. Once AOC gets her Green New Deal the sets will be starving in the streets by the tens of millions.

      1. Well of course there will be millions of people starving in the streets.
        Isn’t that what AOC wants?

    2. The right seems to think increasing the deficit by 2 trillion is worth a short term economic boost so….

      1. You seem to think we can’t tell that is your sock puppet Tones.

  5. Those 1.3 million minimum wage workers who will lose their jobs are all 1-percenters!!

    /more prog logic.

  6. Why are so many internships unpaid?

    1. So that rich kids who have never held a job can develop work discipline?

      1. Yes.

        Except that it allows rich kids to pad their resume. No discipline enhancement is expected.

    2. Because most of the “professionals” in journalism, fashion, NGOs, etc. are barely paid? It would look bad for the interns to make more than a 10 year staff person.

    3. Unpaid internships are a great way to keep the proles in their place.
      Those who can afford to take a job with no pay still get experience on their resume and connections in the industry.
      So who’s likely to get hired for the paying jobs?
      Not the guy who worked 40 hrs/wk bagging groceries instead of interning

      1. And _definitely_ not the guy who never had a first job because $15/hour for baggers and salesclerks is just too much and the supermarkets went to 100 percent self-service.

  7. Easy fix: Make it illegal for employers to fire people. Problem solved. Next: World peace.

    1. Then world peace is easy: make it illegal for people to disagree.

      1. “Then world peace is easy: make it illegal for people to disagree.”

        No, that’s far too extreme.
        Easy Fix: Make it illegal to publicly say Hateful things. The list of Hateful things will be developed and updated daily by the Committee on Peace and Kindness.

    2. At the rate the Democrats and Liberals are going won’t be long before that’s proposed I reckon.

    3. And … we can make it illegal for workers to quit their jobs. Next: World war.

      1. No, no, no.
        Make it illegal for workers in gulags in the Union of Socialist Slave States of America to go on strike or complain.
        Next problem up: Farting in crowded elevators.

    4. That’s basically the law in many European countries.

  8. It’s not like any prog is going to give a shit about 1.3 million jobs lost – they’re crappy jobs that don’t even pay a living wage, good riddance! Just like Hillary saying that all employers should be made to provide health insurance to their employees and those employers who can’t afford it, well, they’re lousy business owners and deserve to go out of business. The progs will not rest until every last man, woman, and child enjoys an above-average standard of living and those who can’t make it on their own will be subsidized by those who can.

    And for those of us who argue that it’s simply not logically possible for everybody to be above average, well, this is why logic is a tool of the white cis-hetero patriarchy and must be abolished.

    1. Remember, to the average liberal arts major, “average” is not a mathematical function but a noble idea.

    2. “Pay for all jobs will be above average. Anyone not receiving above average income will get a raise until they are above average.” It’s an economic perpetual motion machine! Meanwhile, the cost of everything will increase to cover the new, higher wages thereby wiping out any benefits from the additional income.

  9. Raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would cost an estimated 1.3 jobs but would also lift more workers above the poverty line, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates in a report released Monday.

    The CBO is likely wrong on both of these points.

    1. lift more workers above the poverty line

      Wait! . . . strike that . . . reverse it.

      1. The workers who don’t lose their jobs would be lifted above poverty, because they’d be making their wages, plus the wages previously paid to the now unemployed workers

    2. Rule one with the CBO, triple any negative side effects.

  10. Eighteen states began 2019 with higher minimum wages than they had at the start of 2018, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which tracks state-level policies.

    I, for one, would not mind links guiding us to the sources that you reference, Mr. Boehm.

  11. Good news for the designers of minimum wage policies as this is clearly their cintention. Less self sufficiency and more dependency should swell their voter ranks nicely.

  12. I’m sure they’re hoping way more than 1.3 million will lose their jobs. If they do they’ll become welfare parasites who will consistently vote for more government.
    Aside from factoring in losing all those jobs, they are not factoring in that it will raise the costs of groceries, fast food restaurants and all kinds of other goods and services. And this will be most prevalent at places like Walmart and Burger King, where those legally mandated larger paychecks will be spent on increasingly pricier groceries and burgers, effectively undoing most of the benefit of a larger paycheck.
    I’m really sick and tired of government policies designed around appealing to losers. If you are making significantly less than $15/hour and you aren’t a high school kid with a summer job, an intern, in the very beginning of your career or a similar situation, you must have made some truly crappy life choices and I for one have no sympathy for you.

    1. EXACTLY!! Inflation, particularly of low priced things, will consume a large chunk of the pay increases of minimum wage earners. But they will be beholden to Donkeys that provided the boost, as will those who lose their jobs and now hope for welfare provided by Donkeys. Insane economic policy, but effective politics.

  13. Acting as though it’s as simple as trading 1.3M unemployed for 17M raises severely underestimates the downsides of a $15/hour minimum wage.

    We haven’t even begun to talk about the increases in the cost of labor and of products produced with that labor.

  14. Can someone please explain to me why if this was such a great idea why other states haven’t implemented this? With such inconsequential side effects espoused by the CBO, you would think Kansas would have increased their minimum wage as much as possible to attract workers with more skill. If the economy impacts are as small as indicated by its supporters, Kansas stands more to gain than just about any other state of you follow their logic.

    1. Why not raise the minimum wage to $35 per hour. Think how happy folks could be with just a tad more imagination! Put another way, we’ll just be raising the cost of production by $28 per hour of labor. That will be “just lovely.”

      1. Piker!! Why not $100 per hour? We’d all be rich!

        1. Slacker!
          Everyone gets a million dollars a month and live in California for free!

  15. “Think of teenagers working summer jobs, for example, or students working part-time while they pursue higher education.”

    But college students won’t have to work part-time once free college for all is implemented. And all the money now paid in scholarships can be used to buy solar panels for the dorms.

    1. Yes, soon all will be perfect. Nirvada is so close a hand!!

  16. So compromise and go 12.50 by 2025. The minimum wage should provide for something but $15 in nowhere Alabama is more than one needs for a minimum wage.

    But hey, I’m not a heartless idiot who thinks that if anyone works hard enough they can be CEO and make millions. Someone has to be on the bottom of the totem pole and they shouldn’t be modern day slaves while making a honest living.

    1. “But hey, I’m not a heartless idiot who thinks that if anyone works hard enough they can be CEO and make millions.”
      So you’re just a run of the mill ignoramus.

      “Someone has to be on the bottom of the totem pole and they shouldn’t be modern day slaves while making a honest living.”
      So you’re just a run of the mill ignoramus.

    2. I’ve always felt that a federal minimum wage should essentially direct county-level governments to pass local minimum wage laws based on cost of living in their area

      Also I think a progressive minimum would also be good. like 7.50 for 0-1 dependents (including yourself) 10 for 2 dependents, 12.50 for 3, and 15 for 4 or more.

      Family status is already a protected class under federal antidiscrimination laws, so employers can’t discriminate against workers with more dependents, and you tie the W-4 dependent declarations to how many you actually claim on your taxes the previous year (you can also make this calculation only come after an offer of employment is made, to make it harder for employers to discriminate)

      1. Kevin Smith
        July.8.2019 at 9:50 pm
        “I’ve always felt that a federal minimum wage should essentially direct county-level governments to pass local minimum wage laws based on cost of living in their area…”

        I’ve always felt that anyone who favors minimum wage laws is an economic ignoramus who really shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

        1. Be honest, you’re not even allowed to use your arms when you’re outside your padded room.

          1. Look at what you’ve become. Running obvious sockpuppets and screaming at the old man who screams at clouds is no way for you to go through life Tony.

          2. Tony
            July.9.2019 at 12:05 am
            “Be honest, you’re not even allowed to use your arms when you’re outside your padded room.”

            Shitbag, here, seems to think that bogus claims of my confinement somehow makes his imbecility less idiotic.
            Go fuck your daddy, shitbag.

      2. Sarcasm?

        1. Hard to know anymore.
          It’s not too difficult to imagine a Tucker Carlson-type conservative, or even a Marco Rubio “family values” type conservative, arguing in favor of a proposal like Kevin’s above.

          1. I’m starting to think Alex Jones is on to something with chem trails and fluoride in the water. That, or folks think Idiocracy is a manual.

        2. “Sarcasm?”
          Certainly could be wrong, and the commenter is new here, but I think he’s been busted for stuff like this before and never griped that it was other than serious.

      3. Good idea. Poor people should be encouraged to have more kids that they can’t afford. Tax credits just ain’t enough.

      4. I’ve always felt that a federal minimum wage should essentially direct county-level governments to pass local minimum wage laws based on cost of living in their area

        Also I think a progressive minimum would also be good. like 7.50 for 0-1 dependents (including yourself) 10 for 2 dependents, 12.50 for 3, and 15 for 4 or more.

        Family status is already a protected class under federal antidiscrimination laws, so employers can’t discriminate against workers with more dependents, and you tie the W-4 dependent declarations to how many you actually claim on your taxes the previous year (you can also make this calculation only come after an offer of employment is made, to make it harder for employers to discriminate)

        This is absolute insanity.

        This has got to be a parody. No one can be this stupid and still figure out how to type.

    3. I have a get rich scheme that has worked for millions. Read a book. Learn a needed skill. Work hard. But what the fuck do I know? I’m just a leader at a large company after years of highly technical work without a degree.

      Yep,I read a lot of books. Funny though, I gave them all to my helpless brother to try and help him. The strange thing is that not opening the books didn’t open any doors for him. Can you help me discover the difference?

    4. “But hey, I’m not a heartless idiot ”

      That’s fair, you’re not totally heartless Tony-sock.

    5. they shouldn’t be modern day slaves while making a honest living.

      Well then it’s a good thing they aren’t.

    6. I’m sorry, Tony, but as a male hooker, you’re just not worth $15/h, minimum wage law or not.

  17. Are we gonna pretend the CBO gets things right more often than Miss Cleo?

    1. How many people will be lifted out of poverty when this brings inflation back in a big way?

  18. “Emeryville showdown looms over nation’s highest minimum wage”
    […]
    “A showdown over the nation’s highest minimum wage is looming in Emeryville, where smaller restaurants say they need a break from rising costs and unions argue workers need the money….”
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/emeryville-showdown-looms-over-nation%E2%80%99s-highest-minimum-wage/ar-AAE1hI6

    Note the protesters are SEIU members whose pay is keyed to the M/W. If some brown kid gets tossed off a job, they sure don’t care so long as they get their M/W times multiplier.

  19. One way employers get around this. Say you have a food place with 5 people covering second shift.

    You take your most productive worker and promote him to shift manager on a salary with additional hours and responsibility. Then fire your two least productive workers. You should be able to even out the cost.

    1. The other result is ‘flex hours’
      Used to be that a server in SF had a pretty well-scheded amount of work for a week. Now, it is strictly load-driven. After some threshold of hours, you are informed ‘we need you back tomorrow’.

  20. What we need is some good data, meaning when was the last time we increased the minimum wage by ~100% over 6 years (going from 7.25 to 15 in the 2019-25 time span is ~100%). What happened at that time? Did we see job losses in the proportion that the CBO projects?

    With a labor force of ~160MM people, and 1.3M jobs lost as a result of raising the minimum wage, this is just not a big deal. We are talking about way less than 1% of the total US labor force. I don’t wish harm on anyone, but looking at this in comparison to the entire US labor force is a useful perspective. We are talking about the last half percent (0.50%) of workers. This is change at the outermost margins of jobs.

    But, as multiple people have pointed out, the CBO is not really good at projection. Just look at their PPACA projections before that law was passed. They were totally wrong. Bigly wrong. 🙂

    1. Lets not pretend that it would only impact those making less than $15/hr. I don’t know about you, but I expect a raise as well. Seeing as my value was comparatively diminished, I expect to be newly compensated for my extra work and responsibility that the bottom rung of earners do not comprehend. If I don’t get additional money to cover my additional costs them why would I continue to beat myself up?

      1. “Lets not pretend that it would only impact those making less than $15/hr. I don’t know about you, but I expect a raise as well. Seeing as my value was comparatively diminished, I expect to be newly compensated for my extra work and responsibility that the bottom rung of earners do not comprehend. If I don’t get additional money to cover my additional costs them why would I continue to beat myself up?”

        We were offered an interest in a restaurant several years back, before SF jacked up the M/W. I asked the primary owner what effect the new M/W would have. He said: “None; we already pay more than that to all the staff”.
        Since then, we’ve kept in contact with the owner; the new M/W was a major driver in labor costs across the board. Those who were at $16/hr wanted $18, those at $18 wanted $20, and so forth.
        The oh, so white receptionist Julie certainly didn’t want her pay anywhere close to Juan, washing dishes.

        1. What the fuck is wrong with employees requesting higher wages?

          1. Jesus Christ you’re stupid if that is the question you get from that story.

          2. Tony
            July.9.2019 at 12:15 am
            “What the fuck is wrong with employees requesting higher wages?”

            Dunno, but I wonder why lefty ignoramuses too drunk to understand the post bother to embarrass themselves by commenting.

            1. His sockpuppet “wearingit” was outed and he needed the Soros-trolling check to make rent.

          3. Tony, there is nothing “the fuck wrong with employees requesting higher wages.” Likewise, there is nothing wrong with employers offering LOWER wages. Do you comprehend what I’m saying, honey?

            1. People should be free to accept whatever wage they’re willing to work for. People should be free to offer whatever wage they’re willing to pay.

              1. No shit Sheila.

                And when you have no rights, you can get sent over here on boats and work for a minimum wage of $0.

                Or do we need an extra layer of shit on top of basic market forces if we want to have a society worth living in?

      2. Nunya…I believe you are correct about this. The CBO does project that and additonal 10MM (or roughly 5% of the labor force) would get a ‘bump’ in their pay. I think the same point I made above holds: We are talking about the last 5% to 6% of workers, which from a country-level perspective, just isn’t that big of a deal. We are dealing with the outermost portion of the US labor force.

        In practice, I see something like a ‘bump’ for existing employees (not new hires) in the 3% to 5% range, on top of the mandated increase. Employers are not stupid, they’ll try to pay just enough to retain good people. Sometimes it works.

        1. There will be a much bigger bump than you expect, then.

          Someone who is a college educated professional with a decent job in a low-cost Midwestern state might make $30 / hour. They can currently go out to lunch and grab a Big Mac meal for about $7.50, which is also about what the kid making the Big Mac is earning per hour. The lunch cost is about a quarter of an hour’s pay for the customer.

          If the cost of that Big Mac Meal goes up to $10, $12.50, or $15 then the $30 / hr professional is negatively impacted in that the cost of their lunch now takes 20-30 minutes to earn instead of the previous 15. They are going to want a cost of living adjustment in their paycheck to make up for some or all of that.

          So will people on Social Security. As will many others. What you’re going to get here is a short period of inflation to catch up with the artificially raised minimum wage until everything settles back down to what is basically the status quo ante. No one benefits in the end, people are hurt during the process.

          1. Minadin…A lot of ‘what ifs’ and ‘maybes’. I am just looking at the labor force numbers, not economic impact.

            For economic impact, there are too many variables to say definitively, X% of the price increases we see in [fast food, groceries, new cars, fill in the blank] are attributable to the minimum wage increase. The same is true in predicting the future economic impact; example, remember the injection of a trillion bucks in 2009 was going to spike inflation through the roof? Never happened, and here we are 10 years later, still waiting.

    2. What happened at that time? Did we see job losses in the proportion that the CBO projects?

      Job losses are not the same as workers losing their jobs.

      1. JW….Fair point. I don’t like to see anyone lose their jobs because of something they can’t control (politicians changing the minimum wage).

        The point I made still holds. We are talking about a very, very small proportion of the US labor force.

    3. But you are hitting the big point. Central planners always have the same issue. Data. It’s always massaged. It’s always missing significant points. It’s always trailing reality. Like a physics problem, the data detail needed is impossible to receive because the measuring required would itself change the data.

      You know what can collectively store, measure, and process the data without wide margins of error? The market left free of outside influence.

      1. The laissez-faire market “processes data” in the least efficient way possible, if that’s what you mean.

        1. Lololol that is the dumbest assertion in the history of the universe. It is litetrally exactly wrong.

          Your ignorance is massively entertaining.

        2. Tony
          July.9.2019 at 12:35 am
          “The laissez-faire market “processes data” in the least efficient way possible, if that’s what you mean.”

          The post of an econ-ignoramus!
          No, a totally free market delivers and processes market preferences better than *ANY* alternative, and even an ignoramus like you should know that. Government interference, either by fixing prices or fiddling with the data can only harm the information.
          Try tomorrow morning, when you’re not drunk.

        3. Tony, please, please, please tell us what is the most efficient way possible to have market data processed? We’re spellbound awaiting to learn this new economic truth.

        4. True: the market requires a lot of work to arrive at its allocation of resources, so it is less efficient as a computer compared to central planning. I.e. a lot of people have to think a lot about pricing and economic decisions.

          However, central planning gives you wildly incorrect answers quickly and is subject to corruption and political violence. Market mechanisms actually give good answers and involve only voluntary transactions.

      2. Nunya…I think a ‘data purist’ would agree with your physics problem analogy; as it happens, I work with data purists. What I tell them, “We strive for perfection in all things, but 80% is usually good enough for our purposes [normally to make a business decision]”. I think this pragmatic principle applies here as well – we probably have enough historical data to make some good guesses.

        Hence my observation: It sure would be nice to see what has happened before in a similar circumstance. I just don’t know if we actually have that data, or if a circumstance like this happened before.

  21. A minimum wage is a bad idea. It interferes with the liberty of contract and private property rights.

    But a federal minimum wage is an especially bad idea. Even if one is not opposed to a minimum wage in principle, declaring that a minimum wage should be the same in Pierre, North Dakota should be the same as the minimum wage in New York City is absurd from an economic perspective.

    Unfortunately, raising the minimum wage is one of those things which might actually enjoy bipartisan support between Team Red and Team Blue. State-level minimum wage increases have been successful lately both in red areas and in blue areas. So yeah we’re probably screwed.

    I hope people ‘enjoy’ the result of higher minimum wages:

    https://www.qsrmagazine.com/sites/default/files/styles/story_page/public/qsrsteveeasterbrook00142jasonlittle_0.jpg?itok=njY5PKU7

    I frankly hate the self-serve kiosks because I know it’s putting someone out of a job. I try to avoid using them whenever I can.

    1. It interferes with the liberty of contract and private property rights.

      Secondary concerns compared to the actual physical well-being of people. Indeed, these concerns only matter if they contribute to the well-being of humans. No need to be an absolutist about those things.

      I frankly hate the self-serve kiosks because I know it’s putting someone out of a job. I try to avoid using them whenever I can.

      What’s the point of artificially promoting human labor over technological innovation? I say artificial because governments have the power to decide the minimum wage, even if that minimum is $0. There is no such thing as no policy.

      I say let technology advance without regard to Calvinist nonsense, and then make sure people don’t suffer because of the type of economy our leaders have chosen for us. (Laissez-faire is as much a choice as any other model.)

      1. OK, shitbag, why not spend a bit of time pointing out once again that you have the intelligence of the average rock:

        Tony
        July.8.2019 at 11:50 pm
        “It interferes with the liberty of contract and private property rights.”
        “”Secondary concerns compared to the actual physical well-being of people. Indeed, these concerns only matter if they contribute to the well-being of humans. No need to be an absolutist about those things.””
        So you admit you have no idea that being fired is a ‘primary concern’? Are you really that fucking stupid?

        “”I frankly hate the self-serve kiosks because I know it’s putting someone out of a job. I try to avoid using them whenever I can.”
        “”What’s the point of artificially promoting human labor over technological innovation? I say artificial because governments have the power to decide the minimum wage, even if that minimum is $0″”
        Which it is, regardless of government claims otherwise. You’re fired; your new minimum wage is zero.

        “”There is no such thing as no policy.””
        You just made that up, didn’t you? Drunken shitbags, stupid enough sober, do worse drunk.

        “I say let technology advance without regard to Calvinist nonsense, and then make sure people don’t suffer because of the type of economy our leaders have chosen for us. (Laissez-faire is as much a choice as any other model.)”
        Uh, gee, shitbag, how many contradictions can you get in one drunken sentence?

        1. Do you suck your cousin’s dick with that mouth?

          1. Tony
            July.9.2019 at 12:06 am
            “Do you suck your cousin’s dick with that mouth?”

            Go fuck your daddy and quit accusing people of what you do.
            Do you ever post here when you’re not drunk?

          2. Don’t be jelly, you suck plenty of cousin dick.

          3. A typical response from someone who has less intelligence than your average rock.

            Perhaps I’m insulting rocks.

    2. I frankly hate the self-serve kiosks because I know it’s putting someone out of a job.

      I frankly hate the internet because I know it’s putting someone out of a job.
      I frankly hate the cars because I know it’s putting someone out of a job.
      I frankly hate the electricity because I know it’s putting someone out of a job.
      I frankly hate the television because I know it’s putting someone out of a job.
      Etc, ad infinitum

  22. If implemented by 2025, the CBO estimates, the $15 federal minimum wage would boost paychecks for 17 million workers who would otherwise earn less than $15 per hour.

    That is incorrect. What it might do is boost paychecks for 17 million positions currently filled by workers earning less than $15/hour. But most of the workers currently in those positions would be replaced by other workers actually worth $15/hour.

    1. “…But most of the workers currently in those positions would be replaced by other workers actually worth $15/hour.”

      A distinction totally ignored by those favoring a higher M/W for ‘feelzs’, and certainly so for the SEIU workers whose pay is linked to the M/W (plus that multiplier).

      1. And completely wrong.

        1. Really? Completely wrong… how? Where is your data?

  23. Wow, 13 benefit for every 1 that is newly unemployed. Magic! Makes sense then that we raise the minimum wage to, say, $500 per hour, and just raise taxes enough to put the unemployed on the dole. I hardly think anyone now making $500 would object.

  24. The beauty of having a governing philosophy that has never and can never be tested is that you get to bitch about any trade-off that happens in the real world by policies enacted by serious people.

    1. Tony, having no minimum wage is exactly like the “real world” when free people negotiate selling labor for dollars.

      If I want to hire someone to mow my lawn, I don’t first check what the minimum wage is, and the lawn guy (I’m pretty sure) first doesn’t check the OSHA regs for lawn mowing. We agree on a fair price, he mows the lawn, I pay him. That’s the model that ought to be used for every labor transaction. That’s the ideal.

      1. No it’s not, and you haven’t explained why. A minimum wage is set by law no matter what, even if that minimum is $0. And there was a time when the minimum was $0 for certain laborers, so that’s when you start inserting other ethical norms that have nothing to do with pure supply and demand.

        So why stop there? You can’t enslave people, an ethic that exists on another plane than the alleged virtue of pure supply and demand. Minimum-wage advocates, which includes pretty all the people except those who subscribe to market fetishist philosophies, understand that there’s another valid ethic to bring into play: you can’t run a business if it’s so inept that it can’t afford to pay people a certain minimum wage, perhaps one that allows them to live in a modicum of dignity after working 40 hours.

        If you can’t manage that, you don’t deserve to run a business. Race to the top, not the bottom. It’s not like your way is in any way less the making of a choice and the enacting it in public policy by government force, even if that were for some reason a virtue.

        1. Oh, boy! Shitag proves drunken lefty ignoramus is even More stupid than (maybe) sober:

          Tony
          July.8.2019 at 11:59 pm
          “No it’s not, and you haven’t explained why.”
          Yes, it is and the following bit if imbecility explains it well:
          “A minimum wage is set by law no matter what, even if that minimum is $0. And there was a time when the minimum was $0 for certain laborers, so that’s when you start inserting other ethical norms that have nothing to do with pure supply and demand.”
          Sorry, shitbag, the “real” minimum wage is still zero; you’re fired. Any M/W set by law has no effect on that.

          “So why stop there? You can’t enslave people, an ethic that exists on another plane than the alleged virtue of pure supply and demand.”
          That’s exactly what you propose, and being a mental midget, you are probably incapable of understanding that. No, I’m not about to waste time explaining why; ask help from someone who prefers you alive instead of someone hoping to make the world a better place.

          “Minimum-wage advocates, which includes pretty all the people except those who subscribe to market fetishist philosophies, understand that there’s another valid ethic to bring into play: you can’t run a business if it’s so inept that it can’t afford to pay people a certain minimum wage, perhaps one that allows them to live in a modicum of dignity after working 40 hours.”
          This is simply a pile of lefty talking points which should embarrass a 13 year-old and shitbag is certainly not at that level; it doesn’t deserve a detailed response.

          “If you can’t manage that, you don’t deserve to run a business.”
          This from a shitbag who doesn’t care about those who are now earning the real minimum wage, who has never had any experience in business, and is simply a lefty imbecile.

          “Race to the top, not the bottom. It’s not like your way is in any way less the making of a choice and the enacting it in public policy by government force, even if that were for some reason a virtue.”
          Go ahead, shitbag, start that company! Pay everyone $500/hr! Or STFU; your comments should be embarrassing to a 13 year-old.

        2. There is a great deal of satisfaction in watching Tony definitively prove he doesn’t understand the discussion, while simultaneously making it clear he doesn’t realize that we can see how ignorant he is.

          1. I’m pretty sure he’s drunk early and often. He admits is often enough and the idiocy of the posts suggest when he doesn’t admit it, he is.
            And, like many ‘educated’ drunks, he starts ranting unintelligibly, hoping there’s something in that pile which is not embarrassing.

            1. Well, he certainly isn’t being coherent, even the subhuman level of coherence he normally displays.

              He seem to be just whining and shitting everywhere.

          2. Generally, the extent of knowledge a person has on a subject is relative to how quickly the insults come out.

        3. A minimum wage is set by law no matter what, even if that minimum is $0.

          That makes no sense. First, no one is going to work for 0 wage, unless they are volunteering which is already allowed. And your insistence that not having a law is the same thing as having a law is weird. Do you really think that government doing something and government just staying out of the whole business are equivalent? That government inaction is the same as coercive control?

    2. Tony
      July.8.2019 at 11:42 pm
      “The beauty of having a governing philosophy that has never and can never be tested is that you get to bitch about any trade-off that happens in the real world by policies enacted by serious people.”

      Shitbag here seems to have never heard of Hong Kong, and given the pathetic IQ level, I’m not about to spend any effort explaining it.
      More importantly, having a ‘governing philosophy’ which has bee tested many, many times and has been found to result in mass murder, starvation, people dying while waiting for medical care which never seems to show up, impresses FUCKING LEFTY IGNORAMUSES like shitbag here not at all.
      OK, shitbag, your mom wasn’t smart enough to have an abortion. Can you please avenge that stupidity by fucking off and dying?
      The world (that part with more than two brain cells) pleads with you to do so.

      1. At least you’re here ranting like an insane person and not out in the world doing things.

        1. Tony
          July.9.2019 at 12:02 am
          “At least you’re here ranting like an insane person and not out in the world doing things.”

          Shitbag here, who edits “Dog Walkers Weekly” in a gated community, seems confused.
          My day was spent sending out quotes, approving orders/invoices, and requesting pricing from suppliers for new products which people might actually want to buy, rather than editing a rag which finds its way into the trash before anyone bothers to waste time on it.
          Perhaps shitbag here could tell us when he was ever responsible for delivering a product which people wanted to buy.
          I’m saying “never”.

        2. So what’s with all the lame ass sockpuppets you’ve been running lately Esmeralda?

    3. The beauty of having a governing philosophy that has never and can never be tested is that you get to bitch about any trade-off that happens in the real world by policies enacted by serious people.

      That perfectly describes you, Tony.

  25. Just saw on another site that the CBO estimates were between 1.3-3.7m jobs lost. Why would Boem only quote the lower end of that range when the CBO has a track record of over-estimating benefits and massively under-estimating negatives?

    1. That, and why didn’t Boem mention anything about higher costs for everyone?

  26. “Think of teenagers working summer jobs, for example, or students working part-time while they pursue higher education. ”

    When I was in College I made $1.80/hour, the minimum wage. If I worked 40 hours/week for the 10 weeks I could make money for two semesters of tuition. Today a kid working at $10/hour (more than the minimum) could not pay for a single semester at my alma mater.

    1. “When I was in College I made $1.80/hour, the minimum wage. If I worked 40 hours/week for the 10 weeks I could make money for two semesters of tuition. Today a kid working at $10/hour (more than the minimum) could not pay for a single semester at my alma mater.”

      Yeah, government meddling has made college way more expensive too.

  27. I’m ambivalent about raising the minimum wage, but a result not often discussed is that it would make automation of certain functions more attractive to businesses. Checkers, truck drivers and restaurant clerks spring to mind.

  28. I’ve always wondered why, when they controlled Congress, the Democrats didn’t just index MW to inflation. Now, the cynic in me suspects that the MW is a really great club for the Dems to pull out every once in the while to prove that those nasty old Republicans really are heartless SOB’s.

  29. “CBO Says $15 Federal Minimum Wage Will Cost 1.3 Million Jobs”

    That’s a small price to pay to have a bunch of economic illiterates to feel good about themselves.

  30. No one really cares what the CBO says, especially Republicans. The deficit hawks were absolutely thrilled that their tax cut would blow-up the national debt. It would also enhance expansion of the Gini coefficient — the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Sounds like a great plan for — (you complete) class warfare, financial disaster, socialism, major job losses, etc., etc.

  31. […] columns in the Wall Street Journal, the Republican Party’s Twitter account, libertarian Reason magazine, and a Politico newsletter presented by the anti-wage increase National Restaurant Association all […]

  32. […] columns in the Wall Street Journal, the Republican Party’s Twitter account, libertarian Reason magazine, and a Politico newsletter presented by the anti-wage increase National Restaurant Association all […]

  33. […] columns in the Wall Street Journal, the Republican Party’s Twitter account, libertarian Reason magazine, and a Politico newsletter presented by the anti-wage increase National Restaurant Association all […]

  34. […] columns in the Wall Street Journal, the Republican Party’s Twitter account, libertarian Reason magazine, and a Politico newsletter presented by the anti-wage increase National Restaurant Association all […]

  35. I’m sure certified nursing assistants will love the fact that a greeter at Wal Mart makes the same as they do. I’m also sure that this will definitely not radically destabilize local economies with a below average cost of living.

Please to post comments