Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
LOL a liberal group, hardly surprising.
Stieglitz is pretty far out on the left too. The problem with this is that it is all hand waving at best. Perhaps Stieglitz has a model that he uses that he can compare to the CBO model outputs and we can discuss the models themselves.
I guess no matter how accomplished/distinguished a person may be, as long as a guy on the internet is ready to dismiss them as being liberal we might as well toss that out.
Stiglitz? Arrow? Solow? Make way for Adios.
Quote:
Your take on the underground economy taking up the slack is completely unsubstantiated.
The premise that a larger number of motivated unemployed people will lead to a larger number of them working in underground economies doesn't seem particularly controversial.
Quote:
My view on the minimum wage issue is that it is best addressed at the state and local level. One obvious reason being that the cost of living in NYC is far different than the cost of living in Cedar Rapids, IA.
In an ideal world. Or you could set a federal min that's benchmarked at places with the lowest cost of living, and then give individual states the ability to up it in case you're concerned with some states opting out on account of corporate influence or charlatan politician who writes off anyone who disagrees with their gut intuition as left wing / right wing nuts.
Quote:
Why not just make the minimum wage $50 an hour if doesn't affect the number of jobs in the economy? I am sure you won't claim that the underground economy can pick up that slack. I am pretty sure you'll claim that there is a threshold where the minimum wage does have a significant affect on the economy. What is that threshold? Appeals to authority from liberal economists doing a bunch of hand waving at best doesn't say much. The CBO models aren't above scrutiny for sure. A more useful and meaningful criticism would be to offer some ideas about specifically where the CBO model is wrong.
I didn't claim it doesn't reduce jobs. I said that only measuring legal jobs underestimates the true impact. They had their own criticisms that you can look into on your own if you want.
Why not $50? Because the job losses grow substantially / probably not in a linear fashion, and the people who're benefiting from the higher wages already realize most of the improvement in their quality of life simply by getting a bit further away from the poverty line so they can save some of their income for the future.