SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Center for American Progress reports:
Think a higher minimum wage is a job killer? Think again: The states that raised their minimum wages on January 1 have seen higher employment growth since then than the states that kept theirs at the same rate.
The minimum wage went up in 13 states Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington either thanks to automatic increases in line with inflation or new legislation, as Ben Wolcott reports in his analysis at the Center for Economic and Policy Research. The average change in employment for those states over the first five months of the year as compared with the last five of 2013 is 0.99 percent, while the average for all remaining states is 0.68 percent.
Digging deeper, all but one of those states are experiencing increases in employment, and nine of them have seen growth above the median rate.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Friday July 04 2014, @04:46PM
That does fit with my observation [soylentnews.org] that the nine states with modest, automatic increases in minimum wage did much better over this narrow time period than the states with legislated, larger changes in minimum wage.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday July 04 2014, @06:03PM
Your observation works, but only because it A) assumes correlation = causation, and B) has the cart before the horse.
Point B is especially important here, because small automatic raises in minimum wage are always tied to other measures of economic growth, jobs, market conditions, etc.
So the wage increase is AFTER the already proven growth, rather than before. Wage increase is an effect, not a cause, and it is still inflationary.
And more importantly, in a raising economy, wages have already been bid up, because the burger flippers and waitresses can find other better paying jobs. Those states that use automatic raises in minimum wage are are always following the market derived minimum, not leading it. If anything, these states are only setting a ratchet [wikipedia.org].
Further, a ratcheting minimum wage, when there is an economic downturn like the one we are still climbing out of, simply guarantees that more people will lose their jobs earlier, and be without jobs longer.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Friday July 04 2014, @06:14PM
Correlation is an indication of possible causation. Or it could be an indication of a modestly uncommon cluster that has no actual statistical significance. My observation is an observation whether it's of actual phenomena or spurious coincidence.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Friday July 04 2014, @08:34PM
Way to build confidence! You Go Girl!
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by khallow on Friday July 04 2014, @11:34PM
I didn't build confidence in the first place. Merely, that my original observation fit with someone's scenario. If there really was a causation as a result of the scenario that I was replying to then one would expect to see the correlation of my observation.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Friday July 04 2014, @10:11PM
Unfortunately the worst paid are invariably the last to benefit from an improving economy. Minimum wages have a direct effect on reducing poverty, whilst the free market effect is more to reward the already rich, whilst leaving the poor where they are.
So you believe, yet all the evidence is to the contrary.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!