Skip to main content

Two Links to FEE Articles

This just in, an increase in a minimum wage somewhere was followed by a decrease in job creation. The somewhere is Washington DC. I know, to most of you this is not surprising. While comparing the 12 months after and before the minimum wage hike the article points out that in the...
... year-long period after the first wage increase, employment in all other District industries grew by 1.9 percent. Jobs in higher-wage industries, where the minimum wage is less relevant, thus dramatically outpaced those in the leisure and hospitality sector, where growth was negative 0.1 percent.
Don't y'all cheer at once. Raising the minimum doesn't instantly transmute low-skills-low-pay workers into mid- or high-skills workers. But what was the job growth rate in the 12 months before the minimum wage rise?
That is not the only comparison worth considering. In the 12 months before D.C. raised its minimum wage, jobs in the leisure and hospitality sector grew at a healthy rate of 2.2 percent. After the city government raised the minimum wage, employment growth in this sector turned negative.
So from 2.2 to -0.1 and the only macroeconomic change was a shift in minimum wage. That could be incorrect. There could be another big change in the DC area of sufficient magnitude to expplain this massive negative turnaround low-skill job creation.

~~~  ~~~

In other news, apparently the central transport planners can't plan transport effectively. Economic calculation without market prices is vastly more difficult than with. Who'd a thunk it, amirite?

This article demonstrates that the political mode of production and bureaucratic mode of distribution cannot accurately allocate resources in order to meet consumer demands.

Popular posts from this blog

So I was reading a piece on The Outline about identity politics when the author, Sean McElwee, brought up a survey he had penned and collated to establish how positions on economic and racial issues align;
Could Democrats win over racially conservative whites with economic populism? It’s unlikely, because people who oppose racial justice also tend to oppose liberal economic policies.  To test this, I created scales of economic and racial liberalism, using two questions that have been on the American National Election Studies surveys since 1972. One question asks respondents to place themselves on a one-to-seven point scale on government aid to black Americans, the other on a one-to-seven scale on guaranteeing jobs and income for all Americans. In 1972, only 54 percent of white Americans who took the racially liberal position (supporting aid to black Americans) also took the economically liberal position (guaranteeing jobs and income).  By 2016, 74 percent did. And in 1972, 77 perce…

What Lingos Are Most Similar to English, Though?

Commentaryism - The Death Toll of Capitalism

How many people have died because capitalism exists? How many would still be alive if it had never existed? Let's dig in!

We will take two approaches over the course of this blog post by looking at the the death tolls attributed to the word in its broad popular definition - everything socialists don't like - versus the toll that fits the definition offered previously on this blog.

By the same token I will not lay any outsized figures at any other mode of production's door except where that mode of production demonstrably caused the problem that killed people. It's political ideologies that really matter here, and this is where the first big problem with even trying to lay a specific body count before capitalism runs into problems - there is no political ideology called capitalism.

Now then, Alfonso Gutierrez says in a comment thread that "capitalism and free-markets have murdered billions of people" which is a risky claim at the …