On: Minimum Wage and Job Loss: One Alarming Seattle Study Is Not the Last Word

[michaelmrose]

In some I would argue most cases a job is still viable costs go up or profit goes down.

If a company pays 65% of their employees the minimum and wages go up 5% the company doesn't fire most of its workers it grudgingly pays more.

In a lot of cases the existing low wage is actually below market now and subsidized by benefits like food stamps.

[AnthonyMouse → michaelmrose]

> If a company pays 65% of their employees the minimum and wages go up 5% the company doesn't fire most of its workers it grudgingly pays more.

It depends on what the company's alternatives are. Many companies have only 5% margins to begin with. And most people who suggest minimum wage increases argue for more than just 5%.

> In a lot of cases the existing low wage is actually below market now and subsidized by benefits like food stamps.

That is one of the problems a UBI fixes. Since the money isn't contingent on employment, employers can't pay less against the leverage that without a job the employee would lose their food assistance.

[ResidentSleeper → michaelmrose]

The company already is begrudgingly paying more to a subset of affected employees.