I can testify that labor is scarce. We are up to twenty something job openings that we cannot fill with qualified people, and by qualified, I mean minimum qualifications (no drugs, 21, no criminal history, physically fit).Yes, I agree with you that there are areas of the country in which job growth in certain industries is abundant compared to others in which there is scarcity. I have relatives in Houston, Texas who are doing very well, to put it mildly.
It really is puzzling, though perhaps it shouldn’t be for reasons I’m just not seeing. One sees those scenes on TV where, for example, there are all these young (usually black) men who look very physically capable, and we’re told that unemployment in those areas is stratospherically high and those young men are all angry and frustrated because there are no jobs where they live.I can testify that labor is scarce. We are up to twenty something job openings that we cannot fill with qualified people, and by qualified, I mean minimum qualifications (no drugs, 21, no criminal history, physically fit).
It is a puzzle why people don’t move. But what is even more puzzling is why people don’t even move short distances. For example, Taney County, Mo has an 8.7% unemployment rate and it is just outside of Springfield’s orbit.One of the strangest explanations for local labor shortage that I have heard, and I have heard it second-hand from employers, is the distance from where I live to any major city. Kansas City is about 3 hours from Springfield, Mo, and Tulsa is perhaps two hours away. I do realize someone from, e.g., NYC or Philadelphia might not think of KC or Tulsa as cities worthy of their presence. But regardless, some prospective employees, I am told, have rejected recruiting offers because of that.
My impression of the East Coast is that it’s almost one continuous city from somewhere in Connecticut to somewhere in Virginia. I think there are also megalopolises in parts of the upper Rust Belt. Is it possible that the jobless in those places just can’t abide living in Springfield, Mo because there’s no opera in Springfield and no place where you can spend $5,000 on a pair of handmade Italian shoes? If that really is a significant deterrent, one has to wonder what has happened to people whose forbears came across the sea on a diet of hardtack and salt pork, if that, only to live in a slum and work in a sweat shop, yet be glad to do it for the sake of their children and their childrens’ children.
Taney County is its own employment environment. Silver Dollar City is there and the “Branson strip” of fairly major live entertainment establishments. Lots of hotels. But in the winter months, it’s dead. So there are a lot of seasonally employed people living there. Some of them make a good living even so, some don’t. There are a fair number of marginally employed “entertainment groupies” who barely make a living, but wouldn’t leave the glitter for anything. People who, for example, get a major rush out of having some country music star address them by their first names, stick the “off season” out.It is a puzzle why people don’t move. But what is even more puzzling is why people don’t even move short distances. For example, Taney County, Mo has an 8.7% unemployment rate and it is just outside of Springfield’s orbit.
I guess one way to at least keep the cost of living from always rising would be to change the mandate of the Federal Reserve, whose policy is to maintain a 2% inflation rate. Two percent year after year keeps the cost of living always rising.If you oppose the minimum wage, then promote ways to substantially lower the cost of living.
Offer solutions, not just bumper sticker slogans! Otherwise, most people will brush aside libertarian criticisms and continue to vote for minimum wage increases.
Maybe moving to high-growth areas where there are plentiful jobs is one of the solutions. Yet I suppose it’s not always so easy for everyone to just pack up and move, and for a variety of reasons: the financial cost of moving itself; family ties which may include caring for aging or ill parents as well as having young children who attend schools and have their own friends; the challenge in finding an appropriate place to live in an unfamiliar area which may not be perceived as so welcoming to outsiders who belong to minority races or religions or have other issues such as being gay; living in an area in which one would have to buy a home instead of rent an apartment, as well as buy a car to get around, and lacking the financial resources to do so; an emotional attachment to one’s own neighborhood; and so on. I don’t think it’s because one would miss the opera or expensive Italian shoes since, if one can afford these luxuries, one probably wouldn’t need to look for a better job, unless these items are all being charged on nearly maxed-out credit cards. Further, it would probably be more difficult to move if one is older. Almost EVERYTHING is more difficult when one is older.One of the strangest explanations for local labor shortage that I have heard, and I have heard it second-hand from employers, is the distance from where I live to any major city. Kansas City is about 3 hours from Springfield, Mo, and Tulsa is perhaps two hours away. I do realize someone from, e.g., NYC or Philadelphia might not think of KC or Tulsa as cities worthy of their presence. But regardless, some prospective employees, I am told, have rejected recruiting offers because of that.
My impression of the East Coast is that it’s almost one continuous city from somewhere in Connecticut to somewhere in Virginia. I think there are also megalopolises in parts of the upper Rust Belt. Is it possible that the jobless in those places just can’t abide living in Springfield, Mo because there’s no opera in Springfield and no place where you can spend $5,000 on a pair of handmade Italian shoes? If that really is a significant deterrent, one has to wonder what has happened to people whose forbears came across the sea on a diet of hardtack and salt pork, if that, only to live in a slum and work in a sweat shop, yet be glad to do it for the sake of their children and their childrens’ children.
I realize there are difficulties in moving, and I don’t recommend that people do it just to do it. But there are a fair number of foreign-born in this part of the country, and they’re not all from Mexico of Central America. One acquaintence of mine is from France. He came here when he was in his sixties to start a machining operation from scratch. It’s pretty successful now. I asked him what caused him to do that instead of just starting up in France. “Because you can’t fire anybody in France, no matter what they do.” he said. “Here, if a guy doesn’t do his work, I fire him, and that’s it.”Maybe moving to high-growth areas where there are plentiful jobs is one of the solutions. Yet I suppose it’s not always so easy for everyone to just pack up and move, and for a variety of reasons: the financial cost of moving itself; family ties which may include caring for aging or ill parents as well as having young children who attend schools and have their own friends; the challenge in finding an appropriate place to live in an unfamiliar area which may not be perceived as so welcoming to outsiders who belong to minority races or religions or have other issues such as being gay; living in an area in which one would have to buy a home instead of rent an apartment, as well as buy a car to get around, and lacking the financial resources to do so; an emotional attachment to one’s own neighborhood; and so on. I don’t think it’s because one would miss the opera or expensive Italian shoes since, if one can afford these luxuries, one probably wouldn’t need to look for a better job, unless these items are all being charged on nearly maxed-out credit cards. Further, it would probably be more difficult to move if one is older. Almost EVERYTHING is more difficult when one is older.
The cost of living is a function of supply and demand, plus govt regulations and burdens that drive up the cost. Many areas where the cost of living is high, it is caused by govt interference and regulations.People will continue to advocate for and pass minimum wage increases as the cost of living continues to rise.
Increasing the minimum wage puts more money in people’s pockets; that’s why they vote for it.
I fully agree that “getting a better job” is one solution; I myself will be working towards a law degree once I’m out of the service. However, cost of living will continue to rise. If libertarians and conservatives can’t offer viable solutions to lower the cost of living, you’re wasting your time ranting about the minimum wage.
One of the biggest regulatory barriers that affects the cost of living is zoning laws. Zoning laws artificially increase the price of housing and disproportionately harm low income people. The surprising thing is that zoning is so ubiquitous. It doesn’t matter whether the local government is run by democrats or republicans, neither side is interested in deregulating land markets.The cost of living is a function of supply and demand, plus govt regulations and burdens that drive up the cost. Many areas where the cost of living is high, it is caused by govt interference and regulations.
If you raise wages by govt edict, you will artificially raise living costs.
Except in Houston which has no zoningOne of the biggest regulatory barriers that affects the cost of living is zoning laws. Zoning laws artificially increase the price of housing and disproportionately harm low income people. The surprising thing is that zoning is so ubiquitous. It doesn’t matter whether the local government is run by democrats or republicans, neither side is interested in deregulating land markets.
Very true. And every time someone puts forth a referendum to implement zoning, the voters turn it down. Houston is very unique in its lack of zoning.Except in Houston which has no zoning
I don’t know for sure, but I strongly suspect Houston has a lot of private subdivision restrictions. Oftentimes, subdivision restrictions are a lot more restrictive than zoning ordinances are. But restrictions are private rights (interests in land) not acts of government.Very true. And every time someone puts forth a referendum to implement zoning, the voters turn it down. Houston is very unique in its lack of zoning.
In 1985 the minimum wage in Washington state was a whopping $3.35/hr. Now I think it is something like $9-$10. Now that the city council of Seattle has passed a minimum wage increase to $15/hr, some businesses (smaller mom and pop ones and restaurants) are saying that they will have to cut hours or lay off people as a result of this. So it would seem that for those who lose a job or get their hours reduced, an increase in the minimum wage does not put more money in their pockets.People will continue to advocate for and pass minimum wage increases as the cost of living continues to rise.
Increasing the minimum wage puts more money in people’s pockets; that’s why they vote for it.
I fully agree that “getting a better job” is one solution; I myself will be working towards a law degree once I’m out of the service. However, cost of living will continue to rise. If libertarians and conservatives can’t offer viable solutions to lower the cost of living, you’re wasting your time ranting about the minimum wage.
Actually, from what I read restrictive covenants are very common in Houston. Which some argue is one of the reasons it has lasted so long without zoning. The big advantage of restrictive covenants is that it only affects your land, not your neighbor’s land. With zoning, your neighbors can gang up and restrict the development of your land. That cannot happen with covenants, unless you buy land subject to a covenant. But in that case, you know what you are getting into when you buy the land.I don’t know for sure, but I strongly suspect Houston has a lot of private subdivision restrictions. Oftentimes, subdivision restrictions are a lot more restrictive than zoning ordinances are. But restrictions are private rights (interests in land) not acts of government.
You can restrict just about anything. Most are residential, but you can place commercial and industrial restrictions too.
How many people lost their job and were thrown out of work because the minimum wage was tripled during this period? Answer: NoneIn 1985 the minimum wage in Washington state was a whopping $3.35/hr. Now I think it is something like $9-$10.
The reason the rate is low on because we have driven millions out of the workforce . It is a perverse measurement when you measure success by discouraging people so much they no longer look for a job . We have the lowest workforce participation in decadesHow many people lost their job and were thrown out of work because the minimum wage was tripled during this period? Answer: None
The unemployment rate in 1985 was 7.2%
The unemployment rate today is 5.5%
In other words, by tripling the minimum wage, the unemployment rate has decreased from 7.2 to 5.5 which is a decrease of about 25%. The higher the minimum wage, the more people have jobs.
Actually, it is not clear that Adam Smith would be against a minimum wage. But, I am not sure that things would be hugely different if there were no minimum wage, since in the US only about 2% of the workforce are paid the minimum wage.Question, what if there was no minimum wage? What do our Adam Smith worshippers think would happen?
It is not clear that wages are low because employers are monopsonistically keeping wages down. For example, where I work we have not hired a native born US citizen in about 15 years. They just don’t apply for our jobs and our starting salary is well above the poverty range. Clearly I think there is a problem because some people are doing very well and others aren’t. And I don’t think it is because those of us doing well are necessarily smarter or harder worker than those doing not so well. But I am not sure raising the minimum wage is going to help anything.As a prudential matter I don’t think $15 is a good idea. But American workers are more productive than ever which has been rewarded with stagnant wages, loss of jobs and outsourcing.
It could be we all get fat. Thats what happened when machines took over agriculture.I agree that raising the will lead to jobs being replaced by technology but that will happen anyway. I saw an article that asked, "If you teach a man to fish he will eat all his life – but what if machines do all the fishing? " Everybody eats? Nobody eats?
True. And food got relatively cheaper as well, as adjusted for inflation. But a lot of people who would have been farm hands, harvest workers, farriers, harness makers, horse breeders, blacksmiths, mill hands, bakers, etc lost their jobs. Were they better off or not in the whole scheme of things? Everybody has his guess, but nobody knows for sure, just like nobody knows for sure whether raising minimum wage for marginal jobs is good or bad for people, on the whole.It could be we all get fat. Thats what happened when machines took over agriculture.