Originally Posted By: Taym
Ok, you linked a study, but you haven't read it, have you?


Yes. I don't know why you would assume that I'm arguing in bad faith here.

Originally Posted By: Taym

so they only show a "metastudy" that seems to support what you say -: so, EVEN in that specific context, there's no "absolutely" and no "proof", and the matter remains open to debate. As it usually happens in science and especially in economics, you know.


The logic I was arguing against was "When prices rise demand lowers. I'm no economics expert but that is fact." The study shows that this is not true in the case of current minimum wage laws in the U.S. I agree that the general matter of whether there might be a correlation between minimum wage laws and unemployment can be debated, but in the U.S., based on current minimum wage laws, my statement that there is no discernible correlation is true.

There may be other data points one cold look at, and I invite anyone who wants to bring those to the table to do so, but without such data points, I consider this study more credible than a simple incantation of the magical words "supply and demand" as if these explain everything in economics.

To satisfy your pedantry, I will hereby ask that my use of the phrases "proven false" and "absolutely correct" be stricken from the record in favor of phrases that suggest that my evidence is merely stronger than any contrary evidence presented, but not dispositive of the general question.

Originally Posted By: Taym

So, I agree no correlation was found. One may still believe there is, and that is perfectly reasonable.


Sure, but the burden is on them to produce supporting evidence.

Originally Posted By: Taym
From an economic/scirntific standpoint, that graph is of no use if you want to make your point: where's "time"?

One may argue that while the increase in minimum wage was causing unemployment, a growing economy offset that trend and we actually saw an increase in employment. Again, that chart without context tells me virtually nothing.


Time is constant for all of the data points (December 2012.) It's not like they're cherry-picked from different times to tell a particular story. It's possible that there are other time periods with a stronger correlation, but of course nobody has provided any such evidence.


Edited by tonyc (11/12/2013 20:53)
_________________________
- Tony C
my empeg stuff