« Response on Gender Gap in enrollments- BECKER | Main | On Internet Gambling-BECKER »

08/05/2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c031153ef013482fda578970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Response on Big Boxes in Chicago-BECKER:

» Marazzi from marazzi
Marazzi prin Omnitechgroup [Read More]

» zac anglogold ashanti from zac anglogold ashanti
Customers want to shop the leader- a store that has a proven record with thousands of customers across the nation. Wireless Toyz represents almost every... [ Read More] [Read More]

» AoC gold from AoC gold
Once you uncover the info you were trying to track down, you can put it to good use. [Read More]

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Haris

"I am impressed by how often errors in economic analysis made by some commentators (including by me!) are caught in other comments. One example is the posted statement that my claim that the ordinance would encourage large retailers to substitute labor for capital is wrong because they have already made all the feasible substitutions. Another post correctly points out that a government-imposed higher wage would encourage more of these substitutions because that raises further the cost of labor relative to capital."

As I am the correcting poster and also a law student, this seems like a good time to ask Messrs Becker and Posner whether they have needs for clerks or research assistants next summer.

Arun Khanna

Chicago could create zones within the subway system map that are on the periphery of the city. This would allow Mayor Daly to make his point, let big box retailers pay competitive wages within those zones and higher wages in areas outside the zones that lie in high density urban areas in Chicago. This system would allow Chicagoites to have a true free choice in retail.

Collestro

Prof,

You said, "No, a rise in minimum wages does not automatically lead to greater inflation. It depends how the Fed reacts, if it reacts at all. Since even national minimum wage laws cover only a small fraction of the labor force, the Fed will surely not respond to a higher minimum imposed on large retailers in Chicago. The effect will initially be to raise unemployment of low skilled workers, and ultimately to reduce wages of low skilled workers employed at other than large retailers."

Why? If a firm, Wal*Mart for example, is forced to raise wages, why would that increase unemployment among low-skilled workers. Why would a small pay increase lead a skilled worker to a low skill position? I assume that a profit-driven enterprise would not employ low skilled workers unless it needs them.

bart

Professor Becker wrote:

"I do not believe the ordinance would violate ERISA by requiring a minimal amount of fringe benefits. After all, companies on their own sometimes raise their fringe benefits to much higher levels than those required by any law."

I have to say I am confused by this comment. I do not see how the two sentences are related. What does the fact that companies sometimes raise fringe benefits to higher levels have to do with whether a local law is preempted by the federal ERISA benefit requirements (which are zero for welfare benefits)?

See the discussion in Part V of Retail Industry Leaders Ass'n v. Fielder.

http://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/Opinions152/Opinions/Walmartopinion.pdf

Haris

Collestro
Forced higher wages would reduce the demand for labor. Firms will hire only to the point that the marginal productivity of labor is equal to the wage rate. If the wage rate is forced up, those employees whose productivity is below it [$10/hr here]. Since the lowest-skilled workers are those with lowest productivity, they would be the ones who would lose jobs. The remaining jobs would be filled by higher skilled workers, either productive people already employed by WalMart or skilled people from the outside. It makes little difference to those who lose jobs who gets the remaining ones. In essence, the ordinance creates fewer jobs at $10 rather than more jobs at the prevailing market wage. The lowest-skilled thus lose out, to the gain of the remaining workers and WalMart's small competitors. Any economic model will show that their gain is less than the workers' loss. [That's even without mentioning that higher unemployment is linked to higher crime.] Thus, rather than helping the lowest-skilled workers, the ordinance punishes them.

joan

When any discussion of minimum wage arises, the simple supply demand curve is produced to show it will hurt unskilled workers by increasing unemployment. Yet when empirical evidence is sought for this, the effect is found to be between very small to nonexistent. (Even for the largest measured increase in unemployment, the total money payments to the group increase.) More sophisticated analysis suggests that the increase in the income generate increased economic activity which goes a long way toward canceling the negative effect predicted by the supply demand curve analysis. What is clear but almost never discussed, it is the “well off” that is hurt by increases in the minimum wage. As I read comments on the web, I am coming to the conclusion that undergraduate economics classes are teaching students little more than how to be shills for the rich. If physics education worked the same way, the world would be full of physics students explaining to the “uneducated masses” that that steel balls and feathers fall at the same rate, because of the law of gravity.

Anonymous

مركز تحميل

Anonymous

thanks for your post.perhaps you will like abercrombie

Anonymous

بنت الزلفي

Anonymous

بنت الزلفي

Anonymous

Thank you, you always get to all new and used it
شات صوتي

Anonymous

pIi3WI

Anonymous

ÿØÿ±ÿØÿ¥ÿ©
___
صور

Anonymous

ÿ¥ÿßÿ™ ŸÖÿµÿ±
--
دردشة مصرية

Anonymous

Good evening. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards.
I am from Vietnam and , too, and now am writing in English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Licensed and bonded authorized dealer of adt security services."

Thank you very much 8-). Tamara.

Anonymous

Thank you, you always get to all new and used it
ÿ¥ÿßÿ™

دردشه

Anonymous

Great. Now i can say thank you!

Anonymous

It is the coolest site, keep so!

Anonymous

Perfect site, i like it!

Anonymous

Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

Anonymous

Perfect site, i like it!

Anonymous

Perfect work!

Anonymous

دردشة برق


دردشة الخليج

Anonymous

thanks to tell me that,i think thats so usefully----
tiffany jewelry
links london

Anonymous

Beautiful site!

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Become a Fan

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31