Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Piece for Peace April 3-5, 2015 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)52. Power and Paychecks PAUL KRUGMAN
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/03/opinion/paul-krugman-power-and-paychecks.html?_r=0
On Wednesday, McDonalds which has been facing demonstrations denouncing its low wages announced that it would give workers a raise. The pay increase wont, in itself, be a very big deal: the new wage floor is just $1 above the local minimum wage, and even that policy only applies to outlets McDonalds owns directly, not the many outlets owned by people who bought franchises. But its at least possible that this latest announcement, like Walmarts much bigger pay-raise announcement a couple of months ago, is a harbinger of an important change in U.S. labor relations.
Maybe its not that hard to give American workers a raise, after all.
Most people would surely agree that stagnant wages, and more broadly the shrinking number of jobs that can support middle-class status, are big problems for this country. But the general attitude to the decline in good jobs is fatalistic. Isnt it just supply and demand? Havent labor-saving technology and global competition made it impossible to pay decent wages to workers unless they have a lot of education? Strange to say, however, the more you know about labor economics the less likely you are to share this fatalism. For one thing, global competition is overrated as a factor in labor markets; yes, manufacturing faces a lot more competition than it did in the past, but the great majority of American workers are employed in service industries that arent exposed to international trade. And the evidence that technology is pushing down wages is a lot less clear than all the harrumphing about a skills gap might suggest.
Even more important is the fact that the market for labor isnt like the markets for soybeans or pork bellies. Workers are people; relations between employers and employees are more complicated than simple supply and demand. And this complexity means that theres a lot more wiggle room in wage determination than conventional wisdom would have you believe. We can, in fact, raise wages significantly if we want to. How do we know that labor markets are different? Start with the effects of minimum wages. Theres a lot of evidence on those effects: Every time a state raises its minimum wage while neighboring states dont, it, in effect, performs a controlled experiment. And the overwhelming conclusion from all that evidence is that the effect you might expect to see higher minimum wages leading to fewer jobs is weak to nonexistent. Raising the minimum wage makes jobs better; it doesnt seem to make them scarcer. How is that possible? At least part of the answer is that workers are not, in fact, commodities. A bushel of soybeans doesnt care how much you paid for it; but decently paid workers tend to do a better job, not to mention being less likely to quit and require replacement, than workers paid the absolute minimum an employer can get away with. As a result, raising the minimum wage, while it makes labor more expensive, has offsetting benefits that tend to lower costs, limiting any adverse effect on jobs. Similar factors explain another puzzle about labor markets: the way different firms in what looks like the same business can pay very different wages. The classic comparison is between Walmart (with its low wages, low morale, and very high turnover) and Costco (which offers higher wages and better benefits, and makes up the difference with better productivity and worker loyalty). True, the two retailers serve different markets; Costcos merchandise is higher-end and its customers more affluent. But the comparison nonetheless suggests that paying higher wages costs employers a lot less than you might think. And this, in turn, suggests that it shouldnt be all that hard to raise wages across the board.
Suppose that we were to give workers some bargaining power by raising minimum wages, making it easier for them to organize, and, crucially, aiming for full employment rather than finding reasons to choke off recovery despite low inflation. Given what we now know about labor markets, the results might be surprisingly big because a moderate push might be all it takes to persuade much of American business to turn away from the low-wage strategy that has dominated our society for so many years...Theres historical precedent for this kind of wage push. The middle-class society now dwindling in our rearview mirrors didnt emerge spontaneously; it was largely created by the great compression of wages that took place during World War II, with effects that lasted for more than a generation. So can we repeat this achievement? The pay raises at Walmart and McDonalds brought on by a tightening job market plus activist pressure offer a small taste of what could happen on a vastly larger scale. Theres no excuse for wage fatalism. We can give American workers a raise if we want to.
On Wednesday, McDonalds which has been facing demonstrations denouncing its low wages announced that it would give workers a raise. The pay increase wont, in itself, be a very big deal: the new wage floor is just $1 above the local minimum wage, and even that policy only applies to outlets McDonalds owns directly, not the many outlets owned by people who bought franchises. But its at least possible that this latest announcement, like Walmarts much bigger pay-raise announcement a couple of months ago, is a harbinger of an important change in U.S. labor relations.
Maybe its not that hard to give American workers a raise, after all.
Most people would surely agree that stagnant wages, and more broadly the shrinking number of jobs that can support middle-class status, are big problems for this country. But the general attitude to the decline in good jobs is fatalistic. Isnt it just supply and demand? Havent labor-saving technology and global competition made it impossible to pay decent wages to workers unless they have a lot of education? Strange to say, however, the more you know about labor economics the less likely you are to share this fatalism. For one thing, global competition is overrated as a factor in labor markets; yes, manufacturing faces a lot more competition than it did in the past, but the great majority of American workers are employed in service industries that arent exposed to international trade. And the evidence that technology is pushing down wages is a lot less clear than all the harrumphing about a skills gap might suggest.
Even more important is the fact that the market for labor isnt like the markets for soybeans or pork bellies. Workers are people; relations between employers and employees are more complicated than simple supply and demand. And this complexity means that theres a lot more wiggle room in wage determination than conventional wisdom would have you believe. We can, in fact, raise wages significantly if we want to. How do we know that labor markets are different? Start with the effects of minimum wages. Theres a lot of evidence on those effects: Every time a state raises its minimum wage while neighboring states dont, it, in effect, performs a controlled experiment. And the overwhelming conclusion from all that evidence is that the effect you might expect to see higher minimum wages leading to fewer jobs is weak to nonexistent. Raising the minimum wage makes jobs better; it doesnt seem to make them scarcer. How is that possible? At least part of the answer is that workers are not, in fact, commodities. A bushel of soybeans doesnt care how much you paid for it; but decently paid workers tend to do a better job, not to mention being less likely to quit and require replacement, than workers paid the absolute minimum an employer can get away with. As a result, raising the minimum wage, while it makes labor more expensive, has offsetting benefits that tend to lower costs, limiting any adverse effect on jobs. Similar factors explain another puzzle about labor markets: the way different firms in what looks like the same business can pay very different wages. The classic comparison is between Walmart (with its low wages, low morale, and very high turnover) and Costco (which offers higher wages and better benefits, and makes up the difference with better productivity and worker loyalty). True, the two retailers serve different markets; Costcos merchandise is higher-end and its customers more affluent. But the comparison nonetheless suggests that paying higher wages costs employers a lot less than you might think. And this, in turn, suggests that it shouldnt be all that hard to raise wages across the board.
Suppose that we were to give workers some bargaining power by raising minimum wages, making it easier for them to organize, and, crucially, aiming for full employment rather than finding reasons to choke off recovery despite low inflation. Given what we now know about labor markets, the results might be surprisingly big because a moderate push might be all it takes to persuade much of American business to turn away from the low-wage strategy that has dominated our society for so many years...Theres historical precedent for this kind of wage push. The middle-class society now dwindling in our rearview mirrors didnt emerge spontaneously; it was largely created by the great compression of wages that took place during World War II, with effects that lasted for more than a generation. So can we repeat this achievement? The pay raises at Walmart and McDonalds brought on by a tightening job market plus activist pressure offer a small taste of what could happen on a vastly larger scale. Theres no excuse for wage fatalism. We can give American workers a raise if we want to.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
86 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In Yemen the “Axis of kindness” shows the true face of the Empire and proves Lenin right
Demeter
Apr 2015
#3
How Gates the Foundation and Western Countries Are Plotting to Take Control of Africa's Agriculture
Demeter
Apr 2015
#4
Paranoia Reigns in Congress Over an International Financial Cabal By Pam Martens and Russ Martens
Demeter
Apr 2015
#13
How Chicago has used financial engineering to paper over its massive budget gap
Demeter
Apr 2015
#14
A hotel manager in Arkansas fired his employee after she spoke to a reporter about minimum wage
Demeter
Apr 2015
#23
Greece Threatens to Miss IMF Payment, Issue Drachma (Updated) (NOT APRIL FOOLS?)
Demeter
Apr 2015
#30
Greece Throws Away One of Its Eurogroup Memo Wins, Submits Reforms Reaching Up to a 3.9% Fiscal Surp
Demeter
Apr 2015
#31
Some Atlanta Educators Just Learned A Cynical Lesson About Accountability In America
Demeter
Apr 2015
#54
FDIC Employee Quits and Goes Public With Complaint Against Chase, WAMU, Citi and two law firms
Demeter
Apr 2015
#69
European banking supervisor should limit banks’ exposure to all eurozone governments, not just Greec
Demeter
Apr 2015
#55
China’s New Infrastructure Bank Could Be Boon for Private Equity Firms By Ralph Jennings
Demeter
Apr 2015
#58
Man Accused Of Using Religion To Pull Off (MORTGAGE) Scam Gets 30-99 Years Behind Bars
Demeter
Apr 2015
#63
The March jobs report was a big disappointment — and there's probably more to come
Demeter
Apr 2015
#81