You're going to have to do better than there is unemployment there is a minimal wage ergo one caused the other. I'll save you time though, the overall picture of "does a minimal wage cause unemployment?" isn't very clear cut one way or another, regardless of what you think you learned in Econ 101 for exactly the reasons Fly said, the market at the minimal wage isn't perfectly competitive.

fyp

Probably to keep them on the food stamp dependency and voting Democrat. You got us! All work place regulations are, in fact, socialist Jew tricks to enslave the population. Child labor, OSHA, anti-discrimination, everything.

It's definitely not to remedy a power imbalance between large employers and low skill workers in an attempt to allow them to earn a living wage. This is why prior to the development of the minimum wage(etc.) unemployment was 0%.

That would indicate that there's an oversupply of people who can perform the job. Hence the laborer would not have maximum bargaining power in that market. Now if you made the minimum wage $20, the employer would hire one worker and he would receive more than he would if the minimum wage were lower. So yes, the minimum wage undoubtedly increases the wages of low-skilled workers, but it also increases the unemployment rate of low-skilled workers as well.

A drumbeat of mine is that Rand(just like Ron)'s biggest problem isn't the wacky associations or the conspiracy stuff. That's bad, sure.

It's not even the fringe deviations from GOP orthodoxy they take on foriegn policy. Rand's biggest problem is and remains that he's fundamentally a moron who has never been told that he's wrong in his life, so he has no ****ing idea what he's talking about:

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...wn-currencies-

Greatwhite what you're saying is theoretically correct. Unfortunately, we don't live in a world where every person who would like to be employed is a rational actor. Preferences matter. When you're faced with not paying your rent or getting job you'd rather not get. People are going to choose the latter.

To sum it up. Workers can hold out for more and reach equilibrium with employers but they don't because of real world circumstances. The demand curve is in reality to the left of where it should be ideally.

I think a lot of the laws were well intended, but have negative consequences. Not sure what I said that makes you think I'm a believer in Jewish conspiracy theories, but closed-minded people like you will make ridiculous assumptions I guess.

Lol because it's possible to get through medical school with that happening. You're falling apart fly

The problem is that there's a lot more laborers than demand for labor right now. You'll see hundreds of people applying for one job.

The stupid thing about the whole "min wage prices jobs out of the market" is a lot of studies have been done and it turns out it doesn't. Min wage is still so low and the jobs are still so important that even if its a net loss for the company in a vacuum they eat it because the people making five times as much like having their offices cleaned etc.

http://i.imgur.com/IWLo6ET.jpg

Like I mentioned earlier, the larger corporations have no problem raising the minimum wage but small businesses can't afford it. All things being equal raising the minimum wage will absolutely result in a lower amount of jobs otherwise. That's not the question. The question is, is the minimum wage currently set to where it creates the most consumer and producer surplus? At the moment, I would have to say that it does not.

The studies show mixed results but the CBO felt comfortable enough that an increase in the min wage resulted in fewer min wage jobs they used a central estimate of down 500,000 jobs when analyzing the 10.10 option. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995

There's two schools of economic thought and Krugman is clearly a saltwater guy. Saltwater economists like to ignore logical thinking and pretend that correlation equals causation. Krugman essentially thinks about economics the same way racists like to think about race. Krugman always wants attention and my guess is that he's jealous of Milton Friedman. Krugman did great work on trade, but his career has been going downhill for a while now.

Teenagers living at home can. That's obviously not a very important employment cohort. And of course they can live at home with no job at all, but I'd think the positives of working at a low wage outweigh the negatives for most teens. Especially the ones most keen on taking these jobs. That supplemental income could really make a difference in low-income households.

Man you learned this from ****ing Youtube, did you ever consider that maybe the rando with a webcam may not be in a position to patronize a Nobel Prize Winner?

As opposed to Rand's lack of correlation equals causation vis a vis QE and hyperinflation?

It's amazing that I have no idea what level this post is on, the Paul family is the gift that keeps giving.

No. Inflation is great for debtors (generally poor) and horrible for creditors (generally not poor). Further, poor people don't hold their cash for sustained periods of time so the effect of inflation on the purchasing power of cash doesn't matter to them.

Further, enough with the "we want to eliminate the minimum wage to help minimum wage earners" bull****.

If conservatives actually gave a **** about rewarding work while staying true to their free market love, they would be for eliminating the minimum wage and giving large refundable tax credits to people not earning a living wage. Instead, they are for paying poor people less and **** if its their problem that a full time job can't feed a family let alone pay for the occasional family trip to Olive Garden.

No, inflation is good for creditors as well. Banks get crushed during periods with 0 inflation/deflation because defaults skyrocket, as in the great depression, housing crisis etc. People treat lending/borrowing as some sort of zero sum game where whats good for one party must be bad for the other but thats not true. Mild inflation on par with expectations is the best regime for borrowers and lenders.

Man... L.Rand has ruined Los Dos Politarias !!!1!

Four years ago, the L.Ron containment thread was busting records. It had to be the best of times in Politard history... or at least as good as when L.Ron ran in 2008 (before my time). Every single day you could just google "Ron Paul", and discover another fantastic load of Lulz delivered/discovered from that old codger professional career politician. Someone would x-post that load of Lulz into the L.Ron containment thread... and then the Ronulans would go nuts. Good times.

Instead this losing luser is just... well, relatively boring and a sure loser. What a lusur !!!1! Whatever happened to the (Over)lution ??

I think many of them gave up because the price of gold has killed them and the Paul family has been so wrong about inflation. If you look at zero hedge they used to run a gold article every ten minutes now they pretend like that never happened and just talk endless doomsday.

Price of gold has been falling hasn't it?

Crushed the last 3 or so years.