tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-913439.post6970035938918366026..comments2011-07-26T22:23:11.939-07:00winterspeakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13611241702356475764noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-913439.post-25319980016008651002011-07-12T23:44:05.367-07:002011-07-12T23:44:05.367-07:00Lowering overall wages (not just the minimum wages) would increase consumption, and therefore employment if and only if it also lead to a decrease in prices through what was mentioned somewhere in this discussion, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigou_effect" rel="nofollow">Pigou effect</a>. Lowering minimum wage, if it doesn&#39;t lead to increased hiring (which it won&#39;t if product prices for businesses hiring minimum wage workers stay the same), will decrease total employment since as you mentioned &quot;corporations save more than low income workers&quot;, and high income workers <a href="http://www.bls.gov/cex/2009/standard/quintile.pdf" rel="nofollow">spend less of their income</a> than low income workers.<br /><br />One of the reasons businesses are reluctant to do this is the price of energy and gasoline.<br /><br />But anyway: by <i>selectively</i> lowering wages for full-time work, unemployment would decrease.<br /><a href="http://pastebin.com/QrmDEymL" rel="nofollow">http://pastebin.com/QrmDEymL</a><br /><a href="http://pastebin.com/Q86Zhgs9" rel="nofollow">http://pastebin.com/Q86Zhgs9</a><br /><br />Especially since only <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/06/30/business/20110630poll-full-results.html" rel="nofollow">42%</a> of the general public support gov&#39;t spending to create jobs, and 52% oppose. (Q. 18)Misakihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12737066913010944899noreply@blogger.com