Quote (Black XistenZ @ Sep 9 2020 09:48pm)
That's a very biased data point. Higher minimum wages have almost exclusively been implemented in booming urban areas where the ongoing upward trajectory of the local economy and labor market were able to offset any potential negative affect of raising the minimum wage.
I actually think that higher minimum wages would be a big net positive in almost every place in America - but not to a fixed value, it has to be flexible enough to account for the state of the local economies and labor markets. A $15 minimum wage in Bumfuck, Nebraska would kill jobs, and the fact that it worked out fine in Seattle doesnt disprove that.
One notable study was done at the county-level in California, where minimum wage will change over the course of miles and not states. Basically no change.
If a minimum wage kills jobs depends on if the person produces less value than the wage (which is virtually never) and demand.
If there's demand, and that demand can be satisfied by hiring another person, the person will be hired.
It's also not cut and dry because higher wages make higher demands. There's actually been increased economic activity where minimum wage was implemented, so that also offsets the cost. If everybody has more money they are more likely to buy from WalMart, which actually meant when WalMart raised their internal minimum wage almost all of the money immediately went back to walmart.
Anyway, there's very few areas in America where an increased minimum wage would actually result in unemployment at $15 an hour, and that includes in bumfuck Alabama. Hell, let's just make it $12 and tie to inflation. That'd be a good middle ground.
The automation issue snipa brought up matters, but that'll be solved with greater changes such as a UBI, and I think the faster shit gets automated the more likely we will actually end up with a UBI instead of a hellscape.