LogFAQs > #891640337

Darkman124 posted...

i don't really see this as an issue so long as it's not offsetting >100% of the nominal income gains of said households

i think we can generally recognize that certain product areas with ultra-low profit margins are so inelastic that goods prices are forced to rise when labor costs are forced up by regulation

but so long as this benefits all minimum wage categories, including products whose primary consumers aren't poor, the net effect is a progressive wealth transfer

also goods with larger profit margins, that are more elastic, are also sold by minimum wage workers and cannot simply hike prices and call it a day--the risk of reduced sales would hurt the company more than giving up the profit.

Sure, but there are less labor intensive processes that could respond by cutting hours or pay more than groceries or fast food are able to do, also. And even the, the poor are diverse and include people on fixed incomes or who are unemployed and would not benefit, unless we expect there to be induced demand from the higher pay which I find questionably.

It likely is an overall positive wealth transfer since most poor people spend most of their money on things that are fairly fixed (like housing and transit) but it's not an unambiguous transfer.

josifrees posted...

Need to tie wages to the cost of living. At least that way luxury goods will be the ones with rising prices instead of necessities

I don't think that's how it would work

edit:

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...
josifrees posted...
At least that way luxury goods will be the ones with rising prices instead of necessities

Then, we'll all fight and complain about what's "luxury" and what's not.

will we? cold groceries are exempt from sales tax

depends entirely on where you live
---

He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor.