In 1949, Harry Truman pushed increasing the minimum wage and it was almost doubled as a result of the legislation. (New York Times: When Harry Truman Nearly Doubled the Minimum Wage)
Note: don't forget how niggardly Hillary Clinton has been about the minimum wage. She said $12.00 would be enough until Bernie Sanders shamed her into acting like a Democrat.
I arrived on the planet in 1950, although Harry Truman didn't have much to do with it, and I do not recall the promised tumult, despair, and decay Republican fortune tellers predict if the minimum wage is increased.
In fact, this happened:
Bureau of Labor Statistics Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
From 1949 when the minimum wage was increased until 1953, unemployment plunged.
Pink brought up a confounding factor as the Korean Conflict started in this time so the lads were going to Korea in 1950 and coming back in 1953.
The GOP notes that fact with satisfaction and goes, see, if not for Korea then the economy would have collapsed. That logic wouldn't even fly in a comic book so here's a different data point. Observe the height of unemployment prior to the increase of the minimum wage. Notice it did not even reach the same height after the troops came back from Korea. That was one hell of a collapse, wasn't it.
The destructive potential of raising the minimum wage is vastly exaggerated because ... you know already all the reasons those cheap Republican bastards don't give a fuck about you. Phil Collins covered it a long time ago in people who 'have to take it all instead of one bite.'
Note: don't forget how niggardly Hillary Clinton has been about the minimum wage. She said $12.00 would be enough until Bernie Sanders shamed her into acting like a Democrat.
I arrived on the planet in 1950, although Harry Truman didn't have much to do with it, and I do not recall the promised tumult, despair, and decay Republican fortune tellers predict if the minimum wage is increased.
In fact, this happened:
From 1949 when the minimum wage was increased until 1953, unemployment plunged.
Pink brought up a confounding factor as the Korean Conflict started in this time so the lads were going to Korea in 1950 and coming back in 1953.
The GOP notes that fact with satisfaction and goes, see, if not for Korea then the economy would have collapsed. That logic wouldn't even fly in a comic book so here's a different data point. Observe the height of unemployment prior to the increase of the minimum wage. Notice it did not even reach the same height after the troops came back from Korea. That was one hell of a collapse, wasn't it.
The destructive potential of raising the minimum wage is vastly exaggerated because ... you know already all the reasons those cheap Republican bastards don't give a fuck about you. Phil Collins covered it a long time ago in people who 'have to take it all instead of one bite.'
18 comments:
I am confused if the chart shows that the unemployment went down as the soldiers went to war and returned when they came back. Then supply and demand would have cause wages to increase anyway. Just as in present it is very easy to find a job pay $15 for anyone with the slightest ambition I will use amazon boxpackers as an example
And yes watch what happens with the number of employees in menial positions they will decline. Just as it became corporate policy to reduce employees hours to under 28 hours per week as Obamacare came online. The number 28 is important because if they work less than 28 hours employers are not required to give them health benefits. Results miinimum wage employees need two jobs to be broke
I believe they call that the law,of unintended consequences
I left out that that same employee must work an extra 6 hours per week to pay for thier insurance premium required by Obamacare to be as broke as they were before.
Unemployment was up in 1949 when the legislation went into effect. You can see how it continued dropping until 1953. Whatever the effect on wages anyway, there was no financial catastrophe from increasing the minimum wage and that's shown by the unemployment rate failing to get as high as it had been in 1949 when it went back up.
It's not clear unemployment went back up because of returning troops but it's a good match. There is probably more than one answer, tho.
Of course unemployment drops during a war as the soldiers are taken out of the labor pool. With a smaller labor pool wages will increase as competition for those employees hieghten. Simple Supply and Demand War is over labor pool increases, also contributing to the unrmployment is companies higher less due to increased wages so they can hire less to maintain the same overall labor costs. I lived this in business for 35 years
You are looking at a chart. I am giving you real life actual events hiring and managing minimum wage labor pools for over 35 years
You are looking at a chart. I am giving you real life actual events hiring and managing minimum wage labor pools for over 35 years
You see the same basic correlation during the Viet Nam era except minimum wage only changed about 25%.
Minimum wage was never supposed to be a living wage. It was meant a wage for entry level workforce no one is supposed to stay at that level. One gains experience and training and moves on. Just as welfare unemployment compensation is a temporary hand holding as a person gets on thier feet again
Doc is a prime example of how the system works. Started minimum wage in a bookstore with no help from anyone. And worked the system beautifully, from entry level to owning his own company
The system in action
You're still ignoring the four recessions between 48 and 58. You're also ignoring the impact on inflation in that same period.
I'm not ignoring anything as I don't have a fixation on blaming the economics of the decade on one change to minimum wage. The premise has been increase the minimum wage and employment disintegrates but that wasn't true in this example.
In fact it was the specific design of FDR that the minimum wage should be living wage. He was specific about the stupidity of a country which makes products the workers can't afford to buy. As we see, the same phenomenon exists today.
The advent of credit cards and car financing was a major source of the 50s As was the increase of the scope of the New Deal so hard to say what would have happened if those stimuli were not introduced
Yah, too many variables. My general thinking hasn't changed for quite a while that the biggest thing to wreck the economy and the society was when home prices got too high for a single worker to afford one and then both spouses went to work. GOP screams of family values all the time but that smashed the traditional family all to hell and I submit it had many negative sociological effects beyond the obvious economic ones of driving home prices into the stratosphere.
The reason it takes two incomes is because people want what their parents have. But not wanting to wait the years it took to accuire it
The GOP is not responsible for all the evil in world How is the GOP responsible for people wanting instant gratification.
Nice theory or something but the fact remains a single wage earner could support a household up until maybe late sixties or so and it was all over after that. Blaming that on nebulous theories as you like but the fact remains is it did work and now it doesn't. The GOP sure made one slammin' pile of money on it, tho.
Greed runs at every level. Your nephew Raven qualifies to buy the 5 bed 3 bath 3500 sq ft house that he lives in. On a single income. But that is just another anecdotal story that is not relevant because it isnt a government survey.
Anecdotes are used to prove everything except truth in America.
And you refuse to believe the real world.
Funny how I give real examples
And again that only counts if they are your life experiences
Post a Comment