[bqpro1]

Of course I am not an economist at all, but still I see here some paradox. Minimal wedges are paid for the jobs that require low qualifications or in fact no qualifications. So for example if we raise 4$ per hour to 5$ for such jobs, we may reduce the value of 1 dollar. If 1 hour of such job was worth 4$ and now is worth 5$, then now 1$ has less value than it used to have. As a consequence the whole economy may experience inflation. I do not believe in simple solutions to complicated problems. Printing more money do not reduce poverty and rising minimal wedges is for me a little bit like printing money.

[crdoconnor]

It mostly eats into corporate profits first. Then it starts having an effect on inflation.

If you think corporate profits are too low (fwiw they're at record highs right now), and corporations deserve more profit you shouldn't support a raise in the minimum wage.

If you're interested in what happens to prices if the minimum wage is hiked, read here:

http://164.36.50.178/lowpay/research/pdf/NMW_profits_and_pri...

"Our analysis of retail prices in 3 catering industries (canteens, restaurants and takeaways) does not indicate that prices in these industries were differentially affected according to their exposure to the minimum wage. Surprisingly, the only evidence of any price effect is found in the canteen industry where prices rose by a modest 1% in April 1999. "

[randomdata]

> Minimal wedges are paid for the jobs that require low qualifications or in fact no qualifications.

Technically, minimal wages are paid where supply of labour greatly exceeds demand for labour. It is theoretically possible to see high skilled jobs pay low wages and low skilled jobs pay high wages, and you do see it happen sometimes, though the reverse is definitely more common.