thank you sir for a wonder presentation, am currently doing Masters and my topic is "The role and impact of minimum wage in South African Labour market" very interesting. From your presentation, I tend to question myself whether South African minimum wage is a living wage wage? overall thanks for wonderful presentation. Regards.
Nothing has been said about raising minimum wages actually in turn raises the cost of living. When employers have to pay their workers more, they pass that cost on to consumers, this in turn raises the cost of everything. Round and around we go!
I don't find it fair that at 21, I've worked hard through apprenticeship schemes on incredibly low pay and have fought for my position, with rent for a 3 bedroom house, a family to provide for and now that I am employed, get paid £7.05 an hour, whereas a 25 year old living with parents and no real responsibilities gets a "living wage" at £7.50. It should be worked out on circumstances and not age.
The age based NMW system is mainly tailored in a way that younger people get lower pay so that it doesn't disincentivise firms from employing and training them up. Otherwise, if it was a universal NMW or one based on 'needs' it would cause 'hysteresis' whereby younger, unskilled workers without much training/if any would be unable to get employed (because their labour wouldn't be worth it), preventing them from getting a job and 'working their way up' in skills and position/income within the company.
The biggest problem with abolishing minimum wage is that if wages were lower the welfare bill would increase due to higher in work benefits having to make up the shortfall.
For Papee 3 the Synoptics paper for the diagram in the left you have can even discuss that that is REAL WAGE / CLASSICAL INEMPLOYENENT and the. Discuss the impacts of RESL WAGE INRMPLOYTT ET NENT MICRO AND MACRO
could you argue that a national mimum wage of over £7 for 25+ compared to under 18's who get £4 an hour could actually make it harder for older people to get jobs (especially part time ones) as firms want to save £3 an hour by hiring younger kids?
You could : however I believe to discriminate by age to deliberately lower costs is illegal so you could say in theory it might cause a bit of unemployment for older individuals if firms break the law or do it secretly : but due to discrimination law this should be prevented and if enforced, is not necessarily a disadvantage.
How is the Minimum wage/equilibrium determined? Minimum wage Should be $1000/hr? Why not? How does the gov determine that min wage should $10 or $12 or $14 $16$18 $25 $100 $100+ Show the formula.
A common scenario with parents With less opportunity to be educated because of financial constraints, are compelled to work 2 or 3 jobs to survive. Often their kids who are not supervised end up roaming the streets and joining gangs And find themselves rocketing straight to the penitentiary
For value judgement can you say overall to an extent it can be beneficial to the economy, but depends n the rate that the NMW is set to determine its effectiveness.
It seemed that the since the min wage imo has made the labour market less competitive... It took away the potential employee's power to take a job that pays well and not the same as everyother job for duties and same money. Employers were given the green light to pay a minimum for a role then to add more duties and responsibilities than what was asked of in the past for less money.
hi, I was wondering if you could argue that by increasing the min wage, workers get paid more, thus they consume more, thus demand for goods and services increases which increases the demand for labour in some firms meaning unemployement will decrease more and so income inequality will decrease even further.
Well you could evaluate that by saying since firms costs increase they will increase the price of their goods or services so this wage price spiral might not necessarily improve economic welfare
the consumption depends on the income and number of people getting the income. if income is too high for only few individuals then it will make the market noncompetitive for new workers
so in the exam if i was talking about both trade unions/NMW. Would i have to draw 4 graphs (2 for NMW/2 for Trade unions) for both labour markets, or only draw 2 graphs?
Because they force monopsonies to pay a higher wage, and as they have to do this, they automatically employ more people, as otherwise they would be losing out on potential output the labour could be producing at a constant MC up to the competitive equilibrium. In simple terms, they are forced to adopt the wage and might as well employ more people as, if they don't, they are simply losing out.
I noticed a significant amount of time was focused on the negative aspects as opposed to the positive ones. What about Walmart's corporate welfare scam?
@Kevin Keyes Well, given that there aren't any "positive ones" in reality, that outcome is understandable. Alas, you'll have to explain what you mean by "Walmart's corporate welfare scam". I can, at least, venture a guess. You may have fallen for the debunked fallacy that Walmart's "low" wages ultoimately cost the taxpayers (who are "subsidizing" them) via public assistance. It is one of the dumbest claims of the pro-MW crowd. The employer/employee relationship is an exchange of value for value. As both basic economics and the overwhelming empirical evidence demonstrate, it is economically impossible for employers to underpay workers - who are, in fact, paid neither more nor less (okay, minor fluctuations) than the risk adjusyed marginal revenue product of the labor services provided or, in layman;s terms, what those labor servies are *actually worth* . Further, since minimum wage laws have never benefited workers, never put more money in workers' hands and, instead, increase unemployment, undremine the long term earnings prospects of low wage workers and actually *increase* welfare rolls, it is demonstrably minimum wage laws that cost taxpayers money. [BTW, a mere 5% of the workforce works multiple jobs - and the great majority of them do not do so for economic reasons - mostly teachers and first responders whose schedules make such work viable - so much for the "common scenario".]
@@FletchforFreedom I'm using the term pretty loosely I think . I was referring to an article in Forbes magazine (not exactly a liberal rag) I had read a few years ago that described the situation where employees in the fast food industry, Walmart and other predatory multinational conglomerates, ( my term not thiers) don't earn enough money to afford insurance or basic survival needs so they turn to public assistance and medicaid. We the taxpayers are stuck with this. So it seems like we are subsidizing the huge corporations. I don't know how they mitigate all this with their own taxes or if they do. I've seen numbers flying around that suggest that The majority of minimum wage workers are not students. As everybody knows it's a complex subject and so many different ways to interpret the data . I am only a cave man politician and a pawn in the game of life. To me it looks a lot like social Darwinism but what do I know?
@@kevinkeyes6625 Ah, no. Forbes said no such thing. Forbes merely reported that such endlessly debunked claims were made by such organizations as (union propaganda shop) NELP and Americans for Tax Fairness. Forbes has also published articles pointing out how obviously nonsensical such claims are. No one with a functioning brain stem actually falls for it..... oh. The reality is exactly the opposite of your position (of course no one using the term "predatory multinational conglomerates" has any grasp of reality anyway). As noted in the previous post (which you clearly didn't bother to either read or understand, it is economically impossible to underpay workers. That is an empirically proven fact. Such jobs in fast food and retail, are often the first step *OUT* of poverty. And, as, again, the *FACTS* demonstrate, such jobs *reduce* welfare rolls and the amount paid out in public assistance (as minimum wage laws increase both) so your claims about what taxpayers are stuck with are completely wrong and exactly the opposite of actual fact. You have *NOT* seen numbers that the majority of minimum wage workers are not students from *any* remotely reliable source - maybe you read something from the Economic (sic) Policy Institute or some other discredited site. There is nothing "complex" about the data and the margin is too great for such an error. The facts are clear: Workers are fully compensated for the labor service they provide. The alternatives are pay at that level or no work at all. there is no "pay the higher level and stay employee option. Minimum wage laws have never resulted in anything but disemployment (cuts in hours, benefits, training and outright job loss). And, in fact, regardless of minimum wage levels, total real compensation - what workers actually make adjusted for inflation - has increased steadily and substantially in every decade since statistics have been kept and have, again, never been higher than right now, so the notion that this is "social Darwinism" suffers only from being monumentally stupid. The answer to your last question is easy. What do you know? Apparently a lot of debunked crap and little else.
@@FletchforFreedom 0k Mr Fletch I see you're pretty passionate about your hostility. You're right I didnt see your full text until now. I felt my pulse rate go up a few beats as if I was about to get into a fight over some stupid bullshit that was going on in the playground. Obviously you have spent more thought and energy towards this perspective than I have. So these are generally considered entry level jobs we are talking about. I worked at Karl's jr in my 1st real job. I saw that a couple of my fellow employees were probably going to be lucky to rise to the position of assistant manager within the next 5 or 6 yrs. You might have seen the vacuous stare of someone handing you your food and you just knew the order was all fucked up. That's as far as some people climb. In my heart (snowflake word) I want these poor people with maybe just the the hint of saliva running out the corner of there mouths to not suffer as much. I'm more fortunate, It didn't really take long for me to use my Karl's job as a stepping stone to find something that I better liked and was better compensated for. I don't make a shit load of money now, all these years later , but my life is rich. And I'm not that many steps away from where I was at Karl's jr. Is it so unreasonably hard that we cant raise the price of a big mac or a pair of socks another 5 or 10 cents? Is the system so fragile that it collapses from that weight or wiil the stockholders feel the fly that lands on their shoulder enough to swat it away? They might not even notice it and still make all the money they had the all the opportunities for and worked so hard to accumulate. Can you see my perspective at all? This is about all the energy I can put into this if there is no common ground . Do you have any solutions? Or is there even a problem other than that these uppity commie pinko leftist are making too much noise about nothing.? So if you think I'm missing the point or you think I'm too far gone or theres just too many miles in between us then I understand and this is a great opportunity for you not to respond
@warriorprince101010 Wow, Not only are you an incompetent researcher but you're one of those buffoons who likes their posts the moment they post them (first thumbs up in less than a minute isn't suspicious at all - nooooo). The evidence is literally overwhelming and undeniable that minimum wage laws result *only* in disemployment (cuts in hours, benefits and training and outright job loss) to the detriment of workers. You either didn't even bother to look or you engaged in confirmation bias and put your fingers in your ears and hummed whenever coming across evidence that didn't conform to your (ill informed) world view. Here, let me get you started with the three most comprehensive reviews of the research ever completed a listing of the major studies completed (and their conclusions) over more than seven decades and a more recent study: books.google.com/books/about/Report_of_the_Minimum_Wage_Study_Commiss.html?id=nSHtAAAAMAAJ www.nber.org/papers/w846 www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf www.nber.org/papers/w20724 www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/c876c468-ffca-47ed-9468-7193d734bde9/50-years-of-research-on-the-minimum-wage---february-15-1995.pdf And that;s just the tip of the iceberg. The only way that *anyone* can claim that there is no evidence is because they never bothered to honestly look.
man you really do hate the NMW, this video is all just theoretical on the surface benefits and drawbacks of a NMW as a study guide to A level and IB students. The evaluation of these points could include your emotive opinions on the matter
Would there not be an increase in people working with no mw as people who aren’t qualified for minimum wage would be able to go for jobs that pay less. Also employers will have more money to hire more people. Oh I just got to that part of the vid
Hi, How can you make chains of analysis on the productivity point? For example, if you boost productivity, this would normally lead to a fall in unit costs of production, increasing the firms ability to compete on price, leading t a rise in competition, leading to productive and allocatively efficiency outcomes and a fall in price which benefits consumers. But, the introduction of a NMW increases a firms costs, so how would that work?
well if a firms costs have increased by the introduction of a higher/NMW, the NMW could cause a boost in productivity leading to greater output and a lower price (as workers MRP and efficiency are improving by having a greater incentive to work as they are getting a greater reward( i.e. £££) , then everything you have said above would still stand for a chain of reasoning.
How about a maximum wage? The CEO of a government contractor Transdyne was paid 20 million a year. Why don't we just tap that at say 12 million dollars a year and return the rest to the government from where it came from.
well theoretically is great in real life they will love the country or what most first do really is situate in different countries but function the the domestic countries
The free market wage in a monopsony labour market is below the equilibrium point because a monopsony maximises revenue at point Q1 Q2. The NMW moves the wage to the equilibrium reducing the market failure.
NMW into monopsony, (sole employer of labour that has wage setting power) these firms offer low wages relative to a workers MRP. They apply a Min wage @ the point where supply=demand, increasing wages for those workers with little bargaining power. wage rises from Wm to Wc
That is a monopsony labour market graph, it shows us the impact of only one firm hiring all the labour. Therefore they can pay the labour whatever they like, this tends to be quite low, but as shown on the the video, with a NMW enforced they have to pay a more competitve rate, even though they are the only firm hiring in the market. Follow up this graph by understanding what Trade Unions do to monopsony markets.
+mat drav In general, not in labor markets. Economists no longer take the monopsonist model seriously anymore (based on Joan Robinson's notion of too many workers seeking restricted opportunities). Instead, the term is sometimes (erroneously) used to describe either contractual monopolies (such as for major league baseball players during the reserve clause era) or pay differentials for high skilled, high paid positions where skills may be less transferable (and thus less valuable to a competitor). That pay levels in the competitive market approximate the risk adjusted marginal revenue product has been demonstrated empirically (even in turn of the century company mining towns where many would suspect otherwise).
NJHD yes but a NMW can be evaluated using public interest theory but trade unions can be evaluated with poorer business relationships between employers and employees
i was a proponent of minimum wage to keep employers from lowering the wages more and more because stupid people keep working for those low wages. 3 minutes into this video i can already see how that's just not how you fix that problem.. goes to show the most important thing for making sensible decisions is education. i struggle to see the reason for politics and economics not being taught in school in a democratic state like mine. well, at least i know how to analyze a fucking poem!
time = 2:35 is completely false. Firms having to spend more money on satisfying their employees’ increased wages will not at all incentivize or obligate them in any way to spend even more money on said workers for training, retention, or what have you. Instead, this will likely force small start-ups and struggling small businesses to crumble and also lead to significant job loss nationwide, as instead of crumbling, corporations will lay workers off to maintain a profitable business. So now, while you may have increased the income of previous minimum wage workers, you’ve dropped millions’ from earning $7.50 to earning $0 and being jobless, with less companies hiring because they also had to lay off workers to sustain a profit and cannot afford to pay more employees.
He does go on to argue this exact point in the counter-argument for National Minimum Wage increases as it could create subsequent unemployment in the economy. It is a theory video designed for an a-level question, which tends to be a debate, so the idea doesn't have to be empirical to the real world.
Is the 2nd diuagram on the top right, is that to dowiht bnational mimnum wages in a mospsony. market.- as in a monoposoney- the supply- is equal to the ACL? Thanks!!!!
this guy is doing my econ alevel for me right now
Thankss. I watched it before a test. Had no Idea but now i do. Love this!
thank you sir for a wonder presentation, am currently doing Masters and my topic is "The role and impact of minimum wage in South African Labour market" very interesting. From your presentation, I tend to question myself whether South African minimum wage is a living wage wage?
overall thanks for wonderful presentation.
Regards.
great video, got my exam in the morning and this is a great recap for a question I'm now praying comes up
Did it come up?
@@jamesveitch2798 did it?
did it come up?
Edaluation
AQA May 2019 essay 3 national minimum wage ppl wya
Nothing has been said about raising minimum wages actually in turn raises the cost of living.
When employers have to pay their workers more, they pass that cost on to consumers, this in turn raises the cost of everything.
Round and around we go!
So without the min wage, would the cost of living scale proportionally?
He mentioned cost push inflation
This video was really helpful!
I don't find it fair that at 21, I've worked hard through apprenticeship schemes on incredibly low pay and have fought for my position, with rent for a 3 bedroom house, a family to provide for and now that I am employed, get paid £7.05 an hour, whereas a 25 year old living with parents and no real responsibilities gets a "living wage" at £7.50. It should be worked out on circumstances and not age.
You probably wouldn't have a job at all if you were 25 with the same skills, otherwise you'd be earning £7.50 an hour currently.
The age based NMW system is mainly tailored in a way that younger people get lower pay so that it doesn't disincentivise firms from employing and training them up. Otherwise, if it was a universal NMW or one based on 'needs' it would cause 'hysteresis' whereby younger, unskilled workers without much training/if any would be unable to get employed (because their labour wouldn't be worth it), preventing them from getting a job and 'working their way up' in skills and position/income within the company.
If you have went through an apprenticeship, the career/job you get on the other end of it should not be being paid the NMW.
The biggest problem with abolishing minimum wage is that if wages were lower the welfare bill would increase due to higher in work benefits having to make up the shortfall.
For Papee 3 the Synoptics paper for the diagram in the left you have can even discuss that that is REAL WAGE / CLASSICAL INEMPLOYENENT and the. Discuss the impacts of RESL WAGE INRMPLOYTT ET NENT MICRO AND MACRO
could you argue that a national mimum wage of over £7 for 25+ compared to under 18's who get £4 an hour could actually make it harder for older people to get jobs (especially part time ones) as firms want to save £3 an hour by hiring younger kids?
You could : however I believe to discriminate by age to deliberately lower costs is illegal so you could say in theory it might cause a bit of unemployment for older individuals if firms break the law or do it secretly : but due to discrimination law this should be prevented and if enforced, is not necessarily a disadvantage.
How is the Minimum wage/equilibrium determined?
Minimum wage Should be $1000/hr? Why not?
How does the gov determine that min wage should $10 or $12 or $14 $16$18 $25 $100 $100+
Show the formula.
A common scenario with parents With less opportunity to be educated because of financial constraints, are compelled to work 2 or 3 jobs to survive. Often their kids who are not supervised end up roaming the streets and joining gangs And find themselves rocketing straight to the penitentiary
Ur awesome!!
Why has our minimum wage not kept up with inflation? Could it be a greater hit on the market place and economy to have one now?
Kevin Keyes great point especially somewhere like London where prices alone are increasing rapidly perhaps living wage is more favourable
For value judgement can you say overall to an extent it can be beneficial to the economy, but depends n the rate that the NMW is set to determine its effectiveness.
Good explanation!
I bet this is going to be in Paper 3 Economics this afternoon
It seemed that the since the min wage imo has made the labour market less competitive... It took away the potential employee's power to take a job that pays well and not the same as everyother job for duties and same money. Employers were given the green light to pay a minimum for a role then to add more duties and responsibilities than what was asked of in the past for less money.
The goat
hi, I was wondering if you could argue that by increasing the min wage, workers get paid more, thus they consume more, thus demand for goods and services increases which increases the demand for labour in some firms meaning unemployement will decrease more and so income inequality will decrease even further.
Why the fuck not. It makes sense
Well you could evaluate that by saying since firms costs increase they will increase the price of their goods or services so this wage price spiral might not necessarily improve economic welfare
I think he did work that angle I'm just kissed off he didn't discuss more of the positive aspects
the consumption depends on the income and number of people getting the income.
if income is too high for only few individuals then it will make the market noncompetitive for new workers
No because the cost of goods goes up if they get paid more, so nothing really changes
Can you argue NMW increases the barriers to service-sector markets, decreasing contestability or is that a stretch
can you evaluate a positive impact by talking about a negative impact?
John Simons yes
so in the exam if i was talking about both trade unions/NMW. Would i have to draw 4 graphs (2 for NMW/2 for Trade unions) for both labour markets, or only draw 2 graphs?
How come NMWs and TUs create employment in monopsonys?
Because they force monopsonies to pay a higher wage, and as they have to do this, they automatically employ more people, as otherwise they would be losing out on potential output the labour could be producing at a constant MC up to the competitive equilibrium. In simple terms, they are forced to adopt the wage and might as well employ more people as, if they don't, they are simply losing out.
His views are based on hypothesis, not data.
I noticed a significant amount of time was focused on the negative aspects as opposed to the positive ones. What about Walmart's corporate welfare scam?
@Kevin Keyes Well, given that there aren't any "positive ones" in reality, that outcome is understandable. Alas, you'll have to explain what you mean by "Walmart's corporate welfare scam". I can, at least, venture a guess. You may have fallen for the debunked fallacy that Walmart's "low" wages ultoimately cost the taxpayers (who are "subsidizing" them) via public assistance. It is one of the dumbest claims of the pro-MW crowd. The employer/employee relationship is an exchange of value for value. As both basic economics and the overwhelming empirical evidence demonstrate, it is economically impossible for employers to underpay workers - who are, in fact, paid neither more nor less (okay, minor fluctuations) than the risk adjusyed marginal revenue product of the labor services provided or, in layman;s terms, what those labor servies are *actually worth* . Further, since minimum wage laws have never benefited workers, never put more money in workers' hands and, instead, increase unemployment, undremine the long term earnings prospects of low wage workers and actually *increase* welfare rolls, it is demonstrably minimum wage laws that cost taxpayers money. [BTW, a mere 5% of the workforce works multiple jobs - and the great majority of them do not do so for economic reasons - mostly teachers and first responders whose schedules make such work viable - so much for the "common scenario".]
@@FletchforFreedom I'm using the term pretty loosely I think . I was referring to an article in Forbes magazine (not exactly a liberal rag) I had read a few years ago that described the situation where employees in the fast food industry, Walmart and other predatory multinational conglomerates, ( my term not thiers) don't earn enough money to afford insurance or basic survival needs so they turn to public assistance and medicaid. We the taxpayers are stuck with this. So it seems like we are subsidizing the huge corporations. I don't know how they mitigate all this with their own taxes or if they do. I've seen numbers flying around that suggest that The majority of minimum wage workers are not students. As everybody knows it's a complex subject and so many different ways to interpret the data . I am only a cave man politician and a pawn in the game of life. To me it looks a lot like social Darwinism but what do I know?
@@kevinkeyes6625 Ah, no. Forbes said no such thing. Forbes merely reported that such endlessly debunked claims were made by such organizations as (union propaganda shop) NELP and Americans for Tax Fairness. Forbes has also published articles pointing out how obviously nonsensical such claims are. No one with a functioning brain stem actually falls for it..... oh.
The reality is exactly the opposite of your position (of course no one using the term "predatory multinational conglomerates" has any grasp of reality anyway). As noted in the previous post (which you clearly didn't bother to either read or understand, it is economically impossible to underpay workers. That is an empirically proven fact. Such jobs in fast food and retail, are often the first step *OUT* of poverty. And, as, again, the *FACTS* demonstrate, such jobs *reduce* welfare rolls and the amount paid out in public assistance (as minimum wage laws increase both) so your claims about what taxpayers are stuck with are completely wrong and exactly the opposite of actual fact.
You have *NOT* seen numbers that the majority of minimum wage workers are not students from *any* remotely reliable source - maybe you read something from the Economic (sic) Policy Institute or some other discredited site. There is nothing "complex" about the data and the margin is too great for such an error.
The facts are clear: Workers are fully compensated for the labor service they provide. The alternatives are pay at that level or no work at all. there is no "pay the higher level and stay employee option. Minimum wage laws have never resulted in anything but disemployment (cuts in hours, benefits, training and outright job loss). And, in fact, regardless of minimum wage levels, total real compensation - what workers actually make adjusted for inflation - has increased steadily and substantially in every decade since statistics have been kept and have, again, never been higher than right now, so the notion that this is "social Darwinism" suffers only from being monumentally stupid.
The answer to your last question is easy. What do you know? Apparently a lot of debunked crap and little else.
@@FletchforFreedom 0k Mr Fletch I see you're pretty passionate about your hostility. You're right I didnt see your full text until now. I felt my pulse rate go up a few beats as if I was about to get into a fight over some stupid bullshit that was going on in the playground. Obviously you have spent more thought and energy towards this perspective than I have. So these are generally considered entry level jobs we are talking about. I worked at Karl's jr in my 1st real job. I saw that a couple of my fellow employees were probably going to be lucky to rise to the position of assistant manager within the next 5 or 6 yrs. You might have seen the vacuous stare of someone handing you your food and you just knew the order was all fucked up. That's as far as some people climb. In my heart (snowflake word) I want these poor people with maybe just the the hint of saliva running out the corner of there mouths to not suffer as much. I'm more fortunate, It didn't really take long for me to use my Karl's job as a stepping stone to find something that I better liked and was better compensated for. I don't make a shit load of money now, all these years later , but my life is rich. And I'm not that many steps away from where I was at Karl's jr. Is it so unreasonably hard that we cant raise the price of a big mac or a pair of socks another 5 or 10 cents? Is the system so fragile that it collapses from that weight or wiil the stockholders feel the fly that lands on their shoulder enough to swat it away? They might not even notice it and still make all the money they had the all the opportunities for and worked so hard to accumulate.
Can you see my perspective at all? This is about all the energy I can put into this if there is no common ground . Do you have any solutions? Or is there even a problem other than that these uppity commie pinko leftist are making too much noise about nothing.? So if you think I'm missing the point or you think I'm too far gone or theres just too many miles in between us then I understand and this is a great opportunity for you not to respond
@warriorprince101010 Wow, Not only are you an incompetent researcher but you're one of those buffoons who likes their posts the moment they post them (first thumbs up in less than a minute isn't suspicious at all - nooooo). The evidence is literally overwhelming and undeniable that minimum wage laws result *only* in disemployment (cuts in hours, benefits and training and outright job loss) to the detriment of workers. You either didn't even bother to look or you engaged in confirmation bias and put your fingers in your ears and hummed whenever coming across evidence that didn't conform to your (ill informed) world view. Here, let me get you started with the three most comprehensive reviews of the research ever completed a listing of the major studies completed (and their conclusions) over more than seven decades and a more recent study:
books.google.com/books/about/Report_of_the_Minimum_Wage_Study_Commiss.html?id=nSHtAAAAMAAJ
www.nber.org/papers/w846
www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf
www.nber.org/papers/w20724
www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/c876c468-ffca-47ed-9468-7193d734bde9/50-years-of-research-on-the-minimum-wage---february-15-1995.pdf
And that;s just the tip of the iceberg. The only way that *anyone* can claim that there is no evidence is because they never bothered to honestly look.
awesome
Wow the George Osborne reference. This video is olddd.
tanks mane
can you please do an objective video.......for answering objective questions
Did I miss your list of sources? Where they mainly from Forbes?
This is an economics essay help video. These are all theory points that can used in an a level exam, not a critique on the NMW itself.
man you really do hate the NMW, this video is all just theoretical on the surface benefits and drawbacks of a NMW as a study guide to A level and IB students. The evaluation of these points could include your emotive opinions on the matter
Would there not be an increase in people working with no mw as people who aren’t qualified for minimum wage would be able to go for jobs that pay less. Also employers will have more money to hire more people.
Oh I just got to that part of the vid
Is this nominal or real wages ?
Hi, How can you make chains of analysis on the productivity point?
For example, if you boost productivity, this would normally lead to a fall in unit costs of production, increasing the firms ability to compete on price, leading t a rise in competition, leading to productive and allocatively efficiency outcomes and a fall in price which benefits consumers.
But, the introduction of a NMW increases a firms costs, so how would that work?
well if a firms costs have increased by the introduction of a higher/NMW, the NMW could cause a boost in productivity leading to greater output and a lower price (as workers MRP and efficiency are improving by having a greater incentive to work as they are getting a greater reward( i.e. £££) , then everything you have said above would still stand for a chain of reasoning.
Evaluation . depend how much the minim wage increases by
How about a maximum wage? The CEO of a government contractor Transdyne was paid 20 million a year. Why don't we just tap that at say 12 million dollars a year and return the rest to the government from where it came from.
well theoretically is great in real life they will love the country or what most first do really is situate in different countries but function the the domestic countries
Why is the minimum wage not above the equilibrium?!
The free market wage in a monopsony labour market is below the equilibrium point because a monopsony maximises revenue at point Q1 Q2. The NMW moves the wage to the equilibrium reducing the market failure.
whats the second graph on the right for?
NMW into monopsony, (sole employer of labour that has wage setting power) these firms offer low wages relative to a workers MRP. They apply a Min wage @ the point where supply=demand, increasing wages for those workers with little bargaining power. wage rises from Wm to Wc
That is a monopsony labour market graph, it shows us the impact of only one firm hiring all the labour. Therefore they can pay the labour whatever they like, this tends to be quite low, but as shown on the the video, with a NMW enforced they have to pay a more competitve rate, even though they are the only firm hiring in the market. Follow up this graph by understanding what Trade Unions do to monopsony markets.
what's to the left of supply of labour?
this is unrelated question but is there any market where there is a monopoly and a monosopy
+mat drav In general, not in labor markets. Economists no longer take the monopsonist model seriously anymore (based on Joan Robinson's notion of too many workers seeking restricted opportunities). Instead, the term is sometimes (erroneously) used to describe either contractual monopolies (such as for major league baseball players during the reserve clause era) or pay differentials for high skilled, high paid positions where skills may be less transferable (and thus less valuable to a competitor). That pay levels in the competitive market approximate the risk adjusted marginal revenue product has been demonstrated empirically (even in turn of the century company mining towns where many would suspect otherwise).
Yes, search bilateral monopoly
fuck yeah
The day a person begins to become an adult is the day they move out of their parents home .
does the nmw have the same impact on a monopsony as a TU? if so then why havent the mcl and acl curves shifted like they have done with a trade union?
NJHD yes but a NMW can be evaluated using public interest theory but trade unions can be evaluated with poorer business relationships between employers and employees
Yes it only serves one purpose-the rich get richer, and You know what comes after that.
Where is the evaluation? Thanks for the video though!
I think this video was heavily weighted to one side
Disagreed, the discussion was split 50:50.
@@hbfdfgjcyk555 very true.
i was a proponent of minimum wage to keep employers from lowering the wages more and more because stupid people keep working for those low wages. 3 minutes into this video i can already see how that's just not how you fix that problem..
goes to show the most important thing for making sensible decisions is education. i struggle to see the reason for politics and economics not being taught in school in a democratic state like mine. well, at least i know how to analyze a fucking poem!
Who’s here because they didn’t prepare and is scrambling on the last day before paper 1 tommorow? 😂
You forgot inflation
Pratik Gore he put it in with wage differentials
Im edging to this
time = 2:35 is completely false. Firms having to spend more money on satisfying their employees’ increased wages will not at all incentivize or obligate them in any way to spend even more money on said workers for training, retention, or what have you. Instead, this will likely force small start-ups and struggling small businesses to crumble and also lead to significant job loss nationwide, as instead of crumbling, corporations will lay workers off to maintain a profitable business. So now, while you may have increased the income of previous minimum wage workers, you’ve dropped millions’ from earning $7.50 to earning $0 and being jobless, with less companies hiring because they also had to lay off workers to sustain a profit and cannot afford to pay more employees.
He does go on to argue this exact point in the counter-argument for National Minimum Wage increases as it could create subsequent unemployment in the economy. It is a theory video designed for an a-level question, which tends to be a debate, so the idea doesn't have to be empirical to the real world.
Cracin vid.
national minimum wage is the shiiiiiiiit
naaaaaaaaaaahh
Walter E Williams - The Effects Of Minimum Wage
th-cam.com/video/z8uz3uafMe0/w-d-xo.html
Is the 2nd diuagram on the top right, is that to dowiht bnational mimnum wages in a mospsony. market.- as in a monoposoney- the supply- is equal to the ACL? Thanks!!!!