But it does. Charles Lane at Kaplan:
Yet in July, the federal minimum wage went up as planned, at the cost of 300,000 jobs, according to one economist’s estimate.
As it happens, the employment-reducing effect of minimum wage laws is abundantly documented. Those who take issue with my suggestion are taking issue with that evidence.
The literature is thoroughly compiled and reviewed in “Minimum Wages and Employment,” a 184-page article published three years ago by economists David Neumark and William L. Wascher in Foundations and Trends in Microeconomics, a peer-reviewed journal.
The guy who wrote the editorial in the Wall Street Journal in the first link is one of the co-authors to the second. Can’t Lane find more anti-minimum wage economists? And, for God’s sake, “peer-reviewed journal”, like that was some kind of a trump card?
Think Progress pointed out:
almost all of the economic research on the subject shows that the minimum wage has little to no effect on employment. The most well-known researchers on the subject — David Card and Alan Krueger — examined a minimum wage increase in New Jersey, and found that “employment actually expanded in New Jersey relative to Pennsylvania, where the minimum wage was constant.”
So Lane’s critics present a huge body of evidence undermining his claims and he trots out one guy from UC Irvine and one peer-reviewed article and pretends that refutes it all?
This is so pathetic that I can’t even wrap my head around it.
I try not to hate. I try. But I can’t succeed with Charles Lane.
Update. I hate to get so worked up as this, but it’s just absurd! Lane finds two articles (one of which is just a WSJ piece), with one guy authoring or co-authoring each, and thinks this is something definitive. An idiot part-time blogger like me can find links to five, including the classic study on the subject (EDIT: which is not accepted by some economists, especially conservative ones) and a piece from a Nobel Prize winner, saying the opposite in ten minutes.
How long did he spend on this rebuttal?
Update update. The point here is not that Lane is an asshole for suggesting we lower minimum wage. Nor is to cast aspersion on the work of David Neumark, the economist whose work he cites.
The point here is that Neumark is an economist, who (rightly or wrongly) has made a career of criticizing minimum wage laws (his conclusions, based on my skim, are not simplistic). It’s simply nuts to hold up his work as the consensus of the entire field, especially since critics of Lane’s original article held up a large body of work by various authors who hold different positions on the issue.