(33 Likes) Do conservatives think the minimum wage should be adjusted for inflation? So why?
reflexively rejects any obstacle to the unlimited functioning of the free market. For this reason, conservatives oppose any minimum wage increase. But like many arguments based on ideological bias rather than facts and statistics, this argument sounds good, however – it masks a more cynical agenda. Basically, changes in the minimum wage are related to the redistribution of wealth. In the long run, there is some good evidence that minimum wage increases benefit everyone. HOWEVER, in the short run, the minimum wage allowance “labor” increases at the expense of “capital”. In other words, these changes are BEST for everyone. Notable ‘failors’ also tend to contribute greatly to conservative causes. And like capital gains tax, inheritance tax, and regulations surrounding bank privacy, these contributors are certainly aware they’re advocating an unpopular position. That is, they can’t show their cards and admit their true intentions (are they?) – they have to come up with other arguments. ideologically inspired dogma. Now we are arguing about something other than the main issue. The “new” minimum wage argument has been moved away from peer-reviewed research into a well-crafted, solid narrative. Instead of facts, the voter hears an oversimplified “thought experiment” to cause him to conclude that he understands the issue. From there, it’s easy to convince that voter that you can guess their views on something similar to the same problem. But it isn’t – and the same intellectual arrogance that gets excited to “understand” one problem prevents us from seeing that it doesn’t apply to the other problem. That’s the essence of conservative marketing, and it’s very effective. Think about the minimum wage argument you hear all the time. “If I was doing a job and suddenly the enactment of the minimum wage made me have to pay that worker more money, I would hire fewer workers. Sounds like a good argument. Apart from that, it offers a simple microeconomic structure to refute a much more nuanced macroeconomic problem. It aptly ignores the benefit (to name just a few…) of preferring labor over capital, increased monetary velocity, improved productivity and social mobility. The whole economy and collective understanding is best expressed in Card Kruegers 1993. Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the Fast Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania This is a comparative study of a single MSA connecting the two states. an increase in wages and a non. It turned out that raising the minimum wage did not affect the increase in employment. The AMA contributed to better lives for low-income people who benefited from the pay increase. To be clear, this is not a “stand-alone study” but the culmination of 50 years of economic research on the subject. This is what the real scientific process is all about – rarely “revolutionary” – and more often a collection of small, contentious, mysterious studies that support a slow and steady march of progress. Even as an independent study, the study blocked a series of well-funded and increasingly stupid attacks for one reason: it’s true. (example of problems with the most recent “study” Problems with a New Study on $1 Seattle kenny premium boy love doll Minimum Wage) Honestly, I blame Dems. Rather than using facts to refute an intellectually flawed attack, Democrats are promoting an “underlying challenge” story. But ignoring the conservative dishonesty, they unwittingly affirm it. If voters understood how wealthy interests co-opted misunderstood policies such as opposition to minimum wages to support the largest transfer of wealth in history, they might eventually recognize these “job creators” for what they are. Instead, Democrats I focus on philanthropy and empathy—both noble ideals. But completely incredulous