Ok, maybe I'm getting a bit carried away but it certainly has done some things that are socially beneficial recently.
1. It raised the MW it pays its admittedly underpaid workers
2. In doing so it offers economics its Holy Grail-part of what makes it so Holy for economists is its rarity-a natural experiment. Afterall, there are many conservative economists who see any kind of MW hike as doing grave damage to the economy. You know who I mean-the usual suspects: Sumner, Bob Murphy, Mankiw, Lucas, the entire GOP party. Which brings us to 3.
3. Wallmart is following up to tell us that their increased MW has been quite beneficial.
"Arindrajit Dube enlarges on my post about efficiency wages, pointing out that the same logic applies to firms that have monopsony power. That’s a very good point — and I think we’re circling in on an important part of the logic behind the “new view” on inequality policy, which says that policies to enhance worker bargaining power can have major effects on the distribution of market income."
"The point is that under these circumstances it needn’t be all that hard to push up wages: the threat of union organizing or a consumer boycott, even moral suasion from the government might be enough. So the standard view that it’s very hard to change the distribution of market income, that policy must involve after-market taxes and transfers, may be quite wrong."
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/the-mutability-of-wages/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
It seems to me that a large part of why Walmart and other big companies have raised wages have indeed been the moral suasion from Obama-along with some executive action moves, the latest is his ability to unilaterally move up the wage that cuts off when companies can stop paying overtime.
"Walmart reports that its recent wage hike is paying off via reduced turnover, which produces cost savings that offset the direct expense of the higher wages. In other words, efficiency wage theory is vindicated"
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/notes-on-walmart-and-wages-wonkish/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
So then will Wallmart go for Hillary in 2016-as they both agree on the MW? Probably not as it's doubtful they want to get rid of gender discrimination in wages.
1. It raised the MW it pays its admittedly underpaid workers
2. In doing so it offers economics its Holy Grail-part of what makes it so Holy for economists is its rarity-a natural experiment. Afterall, there are many conservative economists who see any kind of MW hike as doing grave damage to the economy. You know who I mean-the usual suspects: Sumner, Bob Murphy, Mankiw, Lucas, the entire GOP party. Which brings us to 3.
3. Wallmart is following up to tell us that their increased MW has been quite beneficial.
"Arindrajit Dube enlarges on my post about efficiency wages, pointing out that the same logic applies to firms that have monopsony power. That’s a very good point — and I think we’re circling in on an important part of the logic behind the “new view” on inequality policy, which says that policies to enhance worker bargaining power can have major effects on the distribution of market income."
"The point is that under these circumstances it needn’t be all that hard to push up wages: the threat of union organizing or a consumer boycott, even moral suasion from the government might be enough. So the standard view that it’s very hard to change the distribution of market income, that policy must involve after-market taxes and transfers, may be quite wrong."
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/the-mutability-of-wages/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
It seems to me that a large part of why Walmart and other big companies have raised wages have indeed been the moral suasion from Obama-along with some executive action moves, the latest is his ability to unilaterally move up the wage that cuts off when companies can stop paying overtime.
"Walmart reports that its recent wage hike is paying off via reduced turnover, which produces cost savings that offset the direct expense of the higher wages. In other words, efficiency wage theory is vindicated"
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/notes-on-walmart-and-wages-wonkish/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs®ion=Body
So then will Wallmart go for Hillary in 2016-as they both agree on the MW? Probably not as it's doubtful they want to get rid of gender discrimination in wages.
No comments:
Post a Comment