Comments on: The Minimum Wage Mistake http://dqydj.net/the-minimum-wage-mistake/ Enlightened Discussion for the Night and Weekend Crowd. Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:45:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Carnival of Pecuniary Delights No. 24: Friends Edition | Pecuniarities http://dqydj.net/the-minimum-wage-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-245 Carnival of Pecuniary Delights No. 24: Friends Edition | Pecuniarities Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:03:26 +0000 http://dqydj.net/?p=143#comment-245 [...] Don’t Quit Your Day Job… presents The Minimum Wage Mistake. [...] [...] Don’t Quit Your Day Job… presents The Minimum Wage Mistake. [...]

]]> By: PKamp3 http://dqydj.net/the-minimum-wage-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-51 PKamp3 Sun, 28 Jun 2009 18:23:15 +0000 http://dqydj.net/?p=143#comment-51 Hey RubberBaron, thanks for commenting! Since, most likely, no one will defend the negative income tax I'll play devil's advocate for a minute. I assume that the working poor get more respect than the non-working poor. My contention is there are large amounts of people willing to work for less than minimum wage now. Currently, they are receiving aid in the form of food stamps, medicaid, welfare, and a patchwork of other programs. The argument from Friedman went like this: by setting this esoteric 'guaranteed minimum wage', you move people off these hard to administrate programs, (if you believe that government administration is a waste...) and replace it with just one system, the country would be better off than we are today, in terms of reduced administrative costs. We could eliminate programs like minimum wage and its kin. I sympathize with your plight, and it's curious that Milton Friedman is one of the economists associated with the NIT movement. However, it makes sense because currently we are subsidizing people to *NOT* work with all of these programs. The pertinent question of a negative income tax is: Will it work better than the complex system we have now, and encourage people to work? Here's some further reading on the subject: http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/dps/pdfs/dp126003.pdf Hey RubberBaron, thanks for commenting! Since, most likely, no one will defend the negative income tax I’ll play devil’s advocate for a minute.

I assume that the working poor get more respect than the non-working poor. My contention is there are large amounts of people willing to work for less than minimum wage now. Currently, they are receiving aid in the form of food stamps, medicaid, welfare, and a patchwork of other programs.

The argument from Friedman went like this: by setting this esoteric ‘guaranteed minimum wage’, you move people off these hard to administrate programs, (if you believe that government administration is a waste…) and replace it with just one system, the country would be better off than we are today, in terms of reduced administrative costs. We could eliminate programs like minimum wage and its kin.

I sympathize with your plight, and it’s curious that Milton Friedman is one of the economists associated with the NIT movement. However, it makes sense because currently we are subsidizing people to *NOT* work with all of these programs. The pertinent question of a negative income tax is: Will it work better than the complex system we have now, and encourage people to work? Here’s some further reading on the subject: http://www.irp.wisc.edu/publications/dps/pdfs/dp126003.pdf

]]> By: RubberBaron http://dqydj.net/the-minimum-wage-mistake/comment-page-1/#comment-49 RubberBaron Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:23:16 +0000 http://dqydj.net/?p=143#comment-49 And with a reduced minimum wage comes a greater demand for lower paid people. The lower paid tend to work in consumer service industries: burger bars, hotels, cleaning services etc. With negative income tax it means that higher rate tax payers are effectively subsidizing burger bars and hotels. Where's the sense in that? Why should I, in an industry where wages tend to be higher, be hit for subsidizing the old economy? And with a reduced minimum wage comes a greater demand for lower paid people. The lower paid tend to work in consumer service industries: burger bars, hotels, cleaning services etc. With negative income tax it means that higher rate tax payers are effectively subsidizing burger bars and hotels. Where’s the sense in that?

Why should I, in an industry where wages tend to be higher, be hit for subsidizing the old economy?

]]>