What do you think?
Rate this book
Ten Unavoidable Problems with a "Living" Minimum Wage from 100% Waste of Your Money to Millions Unemployed
Part I. Unavoidable Problems with a Living Minimum Wage 1. Millions More Unemployed Even If the Number of Jobs Remains Constant. 2. High-cost labor will be used at a too-high wage, reducing total output. 3. Mandatory Discrimination Against the Disadvantaged. Nobody will Hire Disadvantaged Labor. 4. In the long run, more people will choose to remain minimum wage workers, reducing output. 5. Job Lock and few minimum-wage job openings. People will be locked into bad minimum wage jobs. 6. Wasteful Rent Seeking Job Search Costs 7. Unethical Rent Seeking Costs such as the Casting Couch 8. Knocking the first step off the job ladder for people who need it the most. 9. Reduced Job Training for Everyone. 10. Very Inaccurate Redistribution. Part II. Problems with Card Krueger and other irrelevant, misleading pro-minimum wage arguments 11. Introduction to Part II. An interesting discussion on how many jobs will be lost (not unemployment), but it really does not change the fact that a high minimum wage is an awful idea in any case. 12. There will be virtually no mass layoffs of workers if the minimum wage is raised to $10. 13. As a percent of the total jobs, the effect of raising the minimum wage on number of jobs as is small and close to zero if not zero and is difficult to distinguish from zero. 14. Card-Krueger Fast Food Surveys. Extraordinary Claims Based on Telephone Surveys. 15. Why raising the minimum wage had or has a “small” or no effect on the number of job as a percent of the total jobs. 16. Monopsony – Is this McDonald’s Run Like it’s the Only Employer in a Mining- Company Town? 17. Bargaining Models and Market Power 18. Nonprofit Groups, Unlike McDonald’s, can’t pass the cost increase along to customers. Fewer Services To The Needy Will Be Provided. 19. In the Long Run people will buy efficient gasoline-saving cars. In the long run, employers will buy efficient, labor-saving equipment. 20. A Minimum Wage Increase is The Worst Keynesian Stimulus That I Have Ever Heard of. 21. Ripple (Spillover) Benefits are also Ripple Costs and Ripple Distortions. 22. Ten Unavoidable Problems and More Likely Problems. Why would anyone want a high minimum wage? Using non-technical language and a dialogue format, this short book explains the problems with a high “living” minimum wage and the misleading minimum wage arguments. Economics concepts are presented in a Socratic discussion with a labor activist at McDonald’s. The book’s appendix contains supporting peer-reviewed work. Questions and classroom exercises are included. The author has a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Maryland at College Park and has taught economics in the United States, Europe and Asia.
116 pages, Paperback
First published June 12, 2014
7 people are currently reading
22 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
February 16, 2020
Lived with Steve baba the writer in a dorm setting in Tulalip. May my observation of the writer depick his true nature and character in society. I have observed the writer Constantly have no regard for people he lives with and their well-being. this does not not match up with said persons biography of being a loving and carefree. People that live with these characteristics don't have lives in squalor and surrounded them self with other own filth
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 5, 2016
According to the author, "... a high, living minimum wage is strategic folly from the start or as Milton Friedman stated, 'a monument to the power of superficial thinking.'"
What the author is trying to prove to readers is that raising the minimum wage for workers to an actual living wage is a bad idea.
Obviously Steve Baba does not get paid anything close to minimum wage.
According to this book, "...EMPLOYMENT would not change or fall very slightly. But EMPLOYMENT, people working at jobs, is not the same as UNEMPLOYMENT which is people looking for jobs who can't find jobs... the number of workers employed remained constant, but work supplied by other workers increased, so at $10 or $15 an hour, the supply of labor is greater than the demand for labor."
As far as I am concerned, this is incredibly flawed logic. He states that more people will be looking for work if the minimum wage is raised and he is probably correct about that. However, these people are already unemployed, it is just that their numbers are not included in unemployment statistics because they are not even looking for jobs currently. Some of these people are receiving welfare, some are receiving pensions, some are young people whose parents are covering their expenses. But, if the minimum wage was raised to a "living wage" of course these people would have an incentive to seek employment. They would have the opportunity to get off welfare or to supplement their pension income, etc. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
Lives cannot be wholly measured by statistics, labels and numbers. Just because they are not officially labelled as unemployed, does not mean they aren't employed. It just means that they are labelled something other than "unemployed".
I found it frustrating that the author who purports to have a Ph.D. Is trying to mislead people with this book. And, I feel that he is insulting the reader's intelligence.
He states that "It is 100% waste of the $7.75 pay increase since nobody is better off." This is a total crock of crap. (Excuse my candour.) He uses the example of a stay-at-home Mom to try to prove his point. He says that by the Mom entering the workforce, the kids become "latch-key kids" and no one is better off. I would have to disagree. The kids would be much better off. By working for a decent, living wage, the mother is now able to afford to buy nutritious food for her children and is able to provide them with proper winter coats and boots rather than having to send them to school cold and miserable. Perhaps she might even be able to enroll them in sports or tutoring programs. Any or all of these examples could only come about if the mother was able to earn a decent, living wage and all of these examples enrich her children's lives.
I could refute just about everything Steve Baba writes about, but if I did that this review would be way too lengthy, so I will not do that. Instead, what I will do is give this book a rating of 2 out of 5 stars. ⭐️⭐️
I found the "conversational" style that this book is written in to be extremely annoying. If this had been an actual conversation, it would not come across so stilted. It would also not be so adamantly one-sided.
I also found the author to be condescending. He comes across as if he thinks the reader is ignorant and/or just plain stupid. In my opinion 'talking down' to your readers will not win you any fans. However, I also got the sense that the author would not care if he had fans or not. It is his opinion that is the right one and anyone that disagrees with him must be "stupid".
I am very glad that this book was free on Amazon because that means that I didn't waste any money on it. I only wasted my time.
While I disagree 100% with the author's theories and I am doubtful that the author has much "real-world" experience with people who work for minimum wage, I do agree that his arguments might be persuasive to people who are in a similar socioeconomic class to his own. It is for that reason that I am willing to rate this book higher than I really want to. I rate it as 2 out of 5 stars. ⭐️⭐️
What the author is trying to prove to readers is that raising the minimum wage for workers to an actual living wage is a bad idea.
Obviously Steve Baba does not get paid anything close to minimum wage.
According to this book, "...EMPLOYMENT would not change or fall very slightly. But EMPLOYMENT, people working at jobs, is not the same as UNEMPLOYMENT which is people looking for jobs who can't find jobs... the number of workers employed remained constant, but work supplied by other workers increased, so at $10 or $15 an hour, the supply of labor is greater than the demand for labor."
As far as I am concerned, this is incredibly flawed logic. He states that more people will be looking for work if the minimum wage is raised and he is probably correct about that. However, these people are already unemployed, it is just that their numbers are not included in unemployment statistics because they are not even looking for jobs currently. Some of these people are receiving welfare, some are receiving pensions, some are young people whose parents are covering their expenses. But, if the minimum wage was raised to a "living wage" of course these people would have an incentive to seek employment. They would have the opportunity to get off welfare or to supplement their pension income, etc. THIS IS A GOOD THING!
Lives cannot be wholly measured by statistics, labels and numbers. Just because they are not officially labelled as unemployed, does not mean they aren't employed. It just means that they are labelled something other than "unemployed".
I found it frustrating that the author who purports to have a Ph.D. Is trying to mislead people with this book. And, I feel that he is insulting the reader's intelligence.
He states that "It is 100% waste of the $7.75 pay increase since nobody is better off." This is a total crock of crap. (Excuse my candour.) He uses the example of a stay-at-home Mom to try to prove his point. He says that by the Mom entering the workforce, the kids become "latch-key kids" and no one is better off. I would have to disagree. The kids would be much better off. By working for a decent, living wage, the mother is now able to afford to buy nutritious food for her children and is able to provide them with proper winter coats and boots rather than having to send them to school cold and miserable. Perhaps she might even be able to enroll them in sports or tutoring programs. Any or all of these examples could only come about if the mother was able to earn a decent, living wage and all of these examples enrich her children's lives.
I could refute just about everything Steve Baba writes about, but if I did that this review would be way too lengthy, so I will not do that. Instead, what I will do is give this book a rating of 2 out of 5 stars. ⭐️⭐️
I found the "conversational" style that this book is written in to be extremely annoying. If this had been an actual conversation, it would not come across so stilted. It would also not be so adamantly one-sided.
I also found the author to be condescending. He comes across as if he thinks the reader is ignorant and/or just plain stupid. In my opinion 'talking down' to your readers will not win you any fans. However, I also got the sense that the author would not care if he had fans or not. It is his opinion that is the right one and anyone that disagrees with him must be "stupid".
I am very glad that this book was free on Amazon because that means that I didn't waste any money on it. I only wasted my time.
While I disagree 100% with the author's theories and I am doubtful that the author has much "real-world" experience with people who work for minimum wage, I do agree that his arguments might be persuasive to people who are in a similar socioeconomic class to his own. It is for that reason that I am willing to rate this book higher than I really want to. I rate it as 2 out of 5 stars. ⭐️⭐️
December 4, 2014
This book is written not in a typical narration with dialogue, but in a question and answer type of format. I felt as if I was reading a sesame street service announcement from the 1980s. I speculate the author was trying the Socratic method to reach his conclusion, yet in my opinion, he failed miserably. The entire section #8 was missing! The condescending style in which the book was written puts distance between the author and reader, rather than reaching readers. One of the sources he sites as "proof" of his argument was written in 1965!!! This does not lead the reader to find him credible.
He argued that those with disabilities are hired at $7 to acquire shopping carts in parking lots, and stores would not be able to employ these people if the minimum wage was $15-- then says those same employees were hired in a charity program. Which translates into "the company is getting a tax deduction". Then WHY can the company NOT afford to hire them at higher wages. Then he argues that people who are teenagers, retired, or stay at home mothers would want to look for jobs if the wages were raised. He contends that the same number of jobs would be offered, yet the job market would be flooded with more people who had not been employed before. He then uses these people as examples of how employment will rise. Well. technically this is not true. If you had someone who was not employed before, but is now looking for a job-- does that make them a disenfranchised worker? no. It makes them a newly added person into the job market. He makes it sound as if millions are going to get laid off, however, evidence he provides disputes that. Another point he makes is that those with disadvantages who are unskilled or lazy workers will no longer have jobs, because now the only ones willing to work minimum wage jobs are those who are lazy, unskilled and who do not speak english. But WHY should a company HAVE to employ such a person? The only reason they do is because they cannot find people to work at the lower wages.
The author totally ignores the concept that the wealth of the wealthy is gaining while the poor are getting poorer. Each of the six members of the Walmart family are worth $15 BILLION! Really?? After having a billion, do you really need more? Pay your employees and give them enough money to support themselves! The walmart employees in Germany make $20 US per hour AND have a union. God bless america huh?
He argued that those with disabilities are hired at $7 to acquire shopping carts in parking lots, and stores would not be able to employ these people if the minimum wage was $15-- then says those same employees were hired in a charity program. Which translates into "the company is getting a tax deduction". Then WHY can the company NOT afford to hire them at higher wages. Then he argues that people who are teenagers, retired, or stay at home mothers would want to look for jobs if the wages were raised. He contends that the same number of jobs would be offered, yet the job market would be flooded with more people who had not been employed before. He then uses these people as examples of how employment will rise. Well. technically this is not true. If you had someone who was not employed before, but is now looking for a job-- does that make them a disenfranchised worker? no. It makes them a newly added person into the job market. He makes it sound as if millions are going to get laid off, however, evidence he provides disputes that. Another point he makes is that those with disadvantages who are unskilled or lazy workers will no longer have jobs, because now the only ones willing to work minimum wage jobs are those who are lazy, unskilled and who do not speak english. But WHY should a company HAVE to employ such a person? The only reason they do is because they cannot find people to work at the lower wages.
The author totally ignores the concept that the wealth of the wealthy is gaining while the poor are getting poorer. Each of the six members of the Walmart family are worth $15 BILLION! Really?? After having a billion, do you really need more? Pay your employees and give them enough money to support themselves! The walmart employees in Germany make $20 US per hour AND have a union. God bless america huh?
July 22, 2016
While there is some good information contained in this book the format is beyond frustrating. Written in a conversational style the content is somewhat like reading an exchange between two people, it is not exactly interesting. Additionally there are blank portions and vast spelling and grammar issues. Much of the information, therefore, is overshadowed by the poor formatting and errors in writing. If you really need a quick primer this would be fine but other books on the subject of the minimum wage increase would certainly be a better source.
January 1, 2015
poor logic throughout
The author definitely has an axe to grind. He just keeps using the same examples over and over. And they don't prove his thesis. Just a greedy capitalist not wanting to pay workers a fair wage.
The author definitely has an axe to grind. He just keeps using the same examples over and over. And they don't prove his thesis. Just a greedy capitalist not wanting to pay workers a fair wage.
January 3, 2015
Great explanations against raising the minimum wage
The first half of the book is understandable to the lay man, but things get very complicated in the second half!!
The first half of the book is understandable to the lay man, but things get very complicated in the second half!!
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews