Top economist says raise minimum wage

Is CHINA gonna raise their minimum wage?

Why wouldnt the rest of Americas companys follow Obama's outsourcing Czar, Jeffery Immelt, and move their buisnesses there too?

 

Who cares what China does?

 

Here is what your author said...



Here is what my author said...



Point #1, if a study is not statistically significant it is useless. It doesn't matter what trend it is purported to show. Please look up statistical significance. I do not have the time, energy, nor the inclination to trawl through your 100 spammed sources to figure our which ones are completely useless due to their statistical invalidity.

Point #2, would you call a 1% reduction in employment a "negative employment effect?" I would. The two papers agree on this point 100%. Which begs the question, why are you still arguing with me? We agree on this point.

When slavery was legal there was nearly 100% employment for unskilled African Americans. Most people... at least most Democrats agree that was not the optimal state of affairs. 100% employment at any cost is not an admirable goal.

 

Profits

What Does Profit Mean?
A financial benefit that is realized when the amount of revenue gained from a business activity exceeds the expenses, costs and taxes needed to sustain the activity. Any profit that is gained goes to the business's owners, who may or may not decide to spend it on the business.

Calculated as:

​

Investopedia explains Profit
Profit is the money a business makes after accounting for all the expenses. Regardless of whether the business is a couple of kids running a lemonade stand or a publicly traded multinational company, consistently earning profit is every company's goal.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/profit.asp#ixzz1ZHbqBrpn


Business 101 for the intellectual lightweights.

 

Actual profit for McDonalds was $4.5 Billion in 2010. The federal minimum wage was $7.25. The author in the OP suggested that the minimum wage should be raised to 10.38 which works out to a raise of 3.13 per a minimum wage worker. No raise actually happened in 2010. The raise is theoretical. I did not have the exact percentages of Mcdonalds workers that work in the US or the exact percentage for McDonalds workers that earn minimum wage. So I just assumed I would give a $3.13/hr raise to every McDonald's employee. This grossly overestimates the expense of a minimum wage increase. Once I knew what the increase in wage expense was I deducted the theoretical increase in wage expenses from the actual 2010 profit to get the theoretical profit if an across the board $3.13 wage increase was implemented.

What is it that you are having a hard time understanding?

One number is the actual profit in 2010 with the actual $7.25 minimum wage in place.

The other number is a theoretical number if there was an across the board raise of $3.13/hr/employee.

This intellectual exercise illustrates that for this company they can increase the minimum wage substantially and not fire a single employee or charge the customers a penny more. All the executives get to keep their six and seven figure salaries and the company still makes almost $2 billion dollars.

I really don't understand how I can make this any clearer.

 

And what happened the last time the Democrats raised the minimum wage in 2007 after gaining control of congress?

That's right, we lost jobs.

 

Are you reading this thread or are you just showing up to make partisan comments?

Furthermore in 2007 there was the small matter of the housing market collapse and the Bush economic disaster.

 

$3.13/$7.50= 41.7% increase in minimum wage.


So if I understand this right according to the study 10% increase in minimum wage leads to 1% lower employment. So 41.7% increase in minimum wage leads to a 4.17% decrease in employment. We want to raise unemployment by that much right now? Is that was is being advocated here? Economists scare me, when science doesn't have to control for variables any solution can be argued as a valid solution. I trust economists as much as I trust a 4 year old to be my dentist.

 

First of all I want to thank you for actually reading some of the posts on this forum and doing accurate math with real numbers to back up your point. Whether or not I agree with you it is refreshing to see someone try and use logic and facts for once.

Lowering wages is not the only tool to achieve full employment. Conversley you cannot raise the minimum wage infinitely. Eventually the negative effects of a minimum wage increase out weigh the benefits. Having said that, I illustrated with the example of slavery history is littered with numerous examples of achieving full employment for certain populations without a federal minimum wage. I just don't think any of those examples is acceptable to most people. As with everything in life its a balance.

 

I know what statistical significance means. The point made by the authors of the paper is that the majority of the most credible studies point to negative impacts on employment, hence the majority of the evidence supports my contention.

Because that one percent increase in unemployment disproportionately affects low-skilled laborers, who are disproportionately represented by young people and minorities.

Do you expect to be taken seriously with this kind of outlandish rhetoric? I certainly hope not.

 

This is totally pointless as long as we keep allowing illegals to come over and work for less!!!

 

The min. wage would be over $20 hr. had it maintained equal with the cost of living as it was intended, but got hijacked. What a surprise!
If it had maintained equality, we'd be so strong today individually and collectively there would be no political BS that could stop us, we'd never even need them, everybody would be the king of their worlds.
But NOOOOOOOOOOOO.

 

And we would have even fewer jobs in the U.S. because the wage gap between workers here and abroad would be GIGANTIC. All manufacturing would have left a LONG time ago!

 

Yeah on day two.....

Minimum Wage = Minimum Unemployment
.
.
.

 

4.9 Billion. You're already wrong and I haven't even went through the rest of the post yet.

This is the problem with people who don't know how things work. They assume.

Research the term "Operating Income" and you'll see why everything your doing is pretty much stupid.

Executive pays are all accounted for in the expenses as well, not the profits.

It's perfectly clear. It doesn't make it right. It just pretty much illustrates you don't know what you are doing. Aside for the fact that you used American wages for McDonald stores all over the world which includes over 110 locations and most of which does not actually have a minimum wage to begin with. Your math is wrong, your entire procedure is all wrong. Your procedure is based on a flawed formula to begin with.

Next time you want to pretend to be an accountant take the time to look at a Financial Sheet. Everything involving wages is put into Total Operating Expense, which doesn't even take into the account of taxes rates domestically, tax rates abroad or monthly interest payments. You need to calculate raises with operational expense, not profits. Profits are left behind AFTER taxes and expenses. You have no idea what you are doing.

Next time just leave the accounting for those who are qualified. You just confuse things for others and yourself.

 

MORONIC!
We would have tons of jobs because people would have had plenty of $ to leave labor jobs and become their own bosses and hire others. We'd be screaming for Mexicans to come do all the work needed. And corporations would be neutered along with their massive corruption. The working man would rule and the uber-greedy would die. $20 an hr. PAY IT!

 

Why stop there? Why not $50 or $100 an hour?

 

You of course are correct. Although the article I quoted was published in 2010 it was citing 2009 profit numbers. The actual profit in 2010 was closer to your 4.9 Billion number. Which means they had even more money to spend on share holder dividends and a minimum wage increase. Good point. I think you are finally beginning to get it.

 

Planned economies never work. Laborers should be paid their value, and their value is determined by the supply and demand, not bearucrats trying to correct a social "issue."

 

And who decided supply and demand? The rich elite? No thanks. Government has every right to force good wages.

 

The economy "decides" supply and demand. If you don't like your wage, you can work elsewhere. If nowhere else will pay you what you *think* you deserve, then you don't actually deserve it and are delusional.

Businesses must compete with eachother for higher labor wages, if they pay too low no one will work for them, and if they pay too high they risk competition to other businesses. If you raise the wage of all workers, you raise the cost of all services and goods and accomplish nothing but stifling economic growth.

To boot, planned economies have never worked. Value is determined in the market, and no where else. When bearueacrats start "planning" value, they never are right, and the market always corrects itself eventually anyways. The whole reason we are in this unemployment era is because of economic "planning", and part of that planning is labor laws and minimum wage.

 

So you are saying we all must lower ourselves so these poor companies can "compete"? WHat utter BS. You are nothing but a corporate drone.

 

Lol, no you don't.

This isn't priceline, you don't name your value the invisible hand does.

 

If the min. wage had kept up with inflation we would have millions of workers making that $50 - $100 an hr. now because we'd be booming exponentially and nobody was held down by the poverty wage.

The 'decision' was made long ago to stifle the work force and let the few big dogs rule completely. It was doomed to failure and now we're sucking the putrid rewards of out of control capitalism.