It’s not often one gets so many economic fallacies contained in one area, but this article in Bloomberg is one of those rare instances where we do. Rather than quote relevant areas, I’ll just let you read through it; it’s short but contains many mistakes.
There are several econ 101 problems the author makes this article:
1) the first two charts are meaningless. Looking at total unemployment and total wages and not minimum wage unemployment and wages, obscures the truth. For example, if a minimum wage worker was laid off but two new CEOs were hired, then the unemployment rate would fall and real wages would rise. The cost of the minimum wage would be hidden by the hiring of the CEOs.
2) The final graph is the clincher: the minimum wage, at $11 is well below what the workers were already making! According to the graph, they’ve earned well…
View original post 243 more words