The ideology of "Free trade" is Killing America's Economy

If you're limited to making silly comment then so be it. I thought you could do better

 

The only thing silly that is occurring is demanding evidence for something and then resorting to slanderous remarks once it's provided.

Speaking of expecting better:

 

Demanding pertinent evidence! You've come out with the most inane stuff simply because you couldn't find anything better. Improve your literature review methods and stop wasting my time

 

You must be barmy if you think libertarians support the minimum wage. Aside from the basic immorality of interfering in the associations between two individuals, it is one of the top 3 most racist programs in the US.

 

Fake libertarians do not support the minimum wage. This reflects their ignorance of the labour market and the coercive forces created by maket failure. The minimum wage actually allows for greater exhaustion of mutually beneficial exchange. Basic dynamic monopsony for you! To argue against it is therefore actually an attack on exchange

 

Then real libertarians, which you claim to be, are racist. I'm glad I'm not what you call a "real libertarian." Such people should be shunned for the misanthropes that they are.

 

Fake Americans talk like this guy!

 

A nonsense comment. Minimum wages have been found to reduce inefficient wage differentials (e.g. There is analysis into gender wage divides and how, because of differences in the supply for part time labour, the minimum wage eliminates divides that continue despite equal pay legislation).

And racism? We know the required analysis to understand labour market outcome: from neoclassical analysis into 'taste for discrimination' (and its reliance on market power) to institutionalist analysis into hierarchy and the use of 'divide and conquer'. You won't refer to that analysis as you're not actually interested in racism and how to remove the inefficiency from the labour market. You use cliche as a means to hide from genuine comment. Another characteristic of the fake libertarian

 

I think hes a Brit. Europeans have a different concept of libertarianism. More of a socialist labor movement that doesnt look anything like American libertarianism.

 

Even you admit that jobs are shed with each rise in the minimum wage. In a tight job market, the people with the least skills should be grateful to have a job at all. Sure minimum wages may help reduce market failures, but at the cost of shedding jobs for the lowest skilled workers and leaving them on Government transfer payments. But then to a market socialist like you that is no big deal. Dole for every able bodied stupid ass on who resides on the left side of the intelligence bell curve.

 

No I don't. Why are you fibbing?

Dynamic monopsony informs us, for example, that a minimum wage increase can reduce inefficient underpayment. Positive employment effects have also been found, demonstrating the nature of the market failure and how mutually beneficial exchange isn't exhausted. That's the amusing aspect of the fake libertarian; they use political ideology to demand a result that harms exchange.

 

Your mistake is in presuming that if "a minimum wage increase can reduce inefficient underpayment", that it will always do so.

 

It will so long as we're below equilibrium. If we were above equilibrium it'd result in unemployment, if you've got some evidence to substantiate that claim then please do present it. I've not seen it aside from very isolated cases.

 

...............

 

I've made no mistake. You're perhaps confusing yourself over the minimum wage and more general analysis into living wages. The latter can be used to suggest short time disemployment effects are a positive result. Whilst there will be short term welfare costs, it can be argued that- for poverty intensity- a deliberate shift away from low wage labour is a good thing. This is based on the premise that low skill abundance is typically a demand-side phenomenon and, to achieve the necessary shift in resources and regular introduction of upskilling, there needs to be extra-market interference

 

Nope, Ill wait here while you run down that irrelevant tangent.

 

I don't expect a credible response from you. This reflects an innate ignorance of the labour market. Is monopsony the norm? That cannot be denied. We only need imperfect knowledge to derive that result, ensuring that apparently competitive firms still face elasticity in the labour supply schedule that they face. The interesting aspect, however, is that some will see disemployment effects as a positive result. We move away from supply side economics to a demand-led analysis focused on how labour market flexibility is itself the driver of poverty (with a low paid abundance reflecting short term profiteering that harms the skills distribution)

 

No its not and yes it can. Obvious where the ignorance resides.

 

Again you reply with schoolyard prattle. I expected it.

Did you manage to read the EPI study? The author made an error in his summary. He bogusly suggested that a consensus exists over the impact of minimum wages. He's obviously out of date. Analysis into monopsony effects changed all that. It also isn't actually a study. It makes an assumption of the effects and then comes out with a ridiculous job loss range. At no time does it undertake the required econometric or natural experiment methodologies required to estimate minimum wage effects.

 

Revealing. You asked a simple question and I answered NO! and your response is more of your schoolyard prattle.

No he dwells in the real world. You on the other hand are hopelessly trapped in a hypothetical model of a hypothetical economy.

 

Again with the empty comment!

Clearly you haven't read it. The comment he makes is clearly false. Firms face upward sloping labour supply curves. That means minimum wage effects are ambiguous, by definition. Indeed, as originally shown by Burdett and Mortensen, the minimum wage is required for the exhaustion of mutually beneficial exchange (and minimisation of the equilibrium unemployment rate). And the actual 'study' isn't a study. There is no effort to estimate minimum wage effects. It instead takes agreeable results (i.e. its biased from the outset) and, just plugging in some raw data, it comes out with a range that only the gullible would find convincing.

 

NO! is all that was required to answer the question. What more did you want.

Still trapped in that hypothetical model of a hypothetical economy.

 

A nothing reply again! Can you dispute that firms have wage making power? Can you dispute that low skill equilibria are demand-led problems?

Whilst we're at it let's consider the latest research into minimum wages. A convenient means to introduce a review of the literature is the meta analysis. Consider, for example, Doucouliagos and Stanley (2009, Publication Selection Bias in Minimum-Wage Research? A Meta-Regression Analysis, 47:2, pp. 406–428 ). This makes the following conclusion:

In any case, with 64 studies containing approximately 1,500 estimates, we have reason to believe that if there is some adverse employment effect from minimum-wage raises, it must be of a small and policy-irrelevant magnitude.

 

liberals like me are against big government regualted trade

 

???? Does nothing to support your claims regarding the effects a minimum wage does have.