| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Comment | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
MIT | Uncertain | 8 |
Low levels of minimum wage do not have significant negative employment effects, but the effects likely increase for higher levels. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Strongly Agree | 8 |
$15.00 will be high enough in the productivity distribution of workers in 2020 to substantially reduce jobs for the less skilled. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Agree | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Disagree | 5 |
I don't think the evidence supports the bold prediction that employment will be substantially lower. Not impossible, but no strong evidence. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Princeton | Uncertain | 4 |
On the margin Card & Krueger show that minimum wages have little impact. In contrast, in France the minimum wage eliminates labor segment. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Disagree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Princeton | Agree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 6 |
Empirical studies disagree on the sign of the effect. Few of those concluding in favor of negative are consistent with "substantially." |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Stanford | Agree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Yale | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 1 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Stanford | Agree | 4 |
Depends on how many exceptions are allowed. Most $15 city min wages exempt union members, for example. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 5 |
I worry that it will be but we don't know enough. Firms may raise prices and the Fed may accommodate some inflation. But the change is large |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
MIT | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Agree | 7 |
Some will move to uncovered sectors and the underground economy, reducing (not reversing) the impact on actual employment. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Chicago | Strongly Agree | 8 |
A $15 minimum wage rise makes entry level / low wage jobs very expensive. It would move the U.S. to be more like France, Italy, etc. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 5 |
In rural areas this will have a significant effect, but in many cities it would not matter much. Teenager employment likely to drop too. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Stanford | Agree | 3 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 4 |
The total increase is so big that I'm not sure previous studies tell us very much. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 6 |
Evidence is that it would be lower by perhaps 1 - 2 %. Lots of margins for adjustments. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Agree | 5 |
Our elasticity estimates provide only local information about labor demand functions, giving little insight into such a large increase. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Princeton | Agree | 5 |
Certainly in states where the median wage is close to $15. Smaller increases would impact employment much less. -see background information here |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
MIT | Disagree | 1 |
Lower, probably; substantially lower, not clear at all. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Chicago | Agree | 7 |
Assuming inflation stays low. There is substantial evidence that labor demand slopes down, at least in the long run |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Chicago | Disagree | 4 |
Empirical evidence suggests the effects on employment would be modest. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Uncertain | 5 |
Lower, yes. "Substantially"? Not clear. For small changes in min wage, there are small changes in employment. But this is a big change. |
Bio/Vote History |
| Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Comment | Bio/Vote History |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
MIT | Strongly Disagree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Harvard | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Strongly Disagree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Berkeley | Strongly Disagree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Disagree | 6 |
If it had any net positive effect, it would likely be very modest. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Disagree | 2 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Princeton | Uncertain | 5 |
It would generate extra demand provided that low-skilled citizen still find jobs and remain integrated in the society. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Disagree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Harvard | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Princeton | Agree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 3 |
Because of labor market frictions and given the high propensity of low-income workers to consume, the effect is uncertain to me.. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Berkeley | Uncertain | 6 |
Small demand-side effects and uncertain supply-side effects make it hard to conclude in favor of "substantially" higher. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Stanford | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 8 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Yale | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Uncertain | 1 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Stanford | Disagree | 8 |
Does anybody have a mechanism in mind that would raise output? Stigler's argument that a min wage might not harm employment does not support |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 5 |
If employment not much affected and redistribution to workers demand could rise. But if sizable unemployment opposite could occur. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
MIT | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Berkeley | Uncertain | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Strongly Disagree | 9 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Strongly Disagree | 10 |
France, Italy, etc. have done this -- making it expensive to hire entry level workers -- contributing to low growth and high unemployment. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Chicago | Disagree | 1 |
Given ambiguous employment effects and the aggregate share of people getting raises, I doubt you get "substantially" more output. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Stanford | Strongly Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Stanford | Uncertain | 4 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Harvard | Uncertain | 5 |
Aggregate demand should be bolstered, but the wage increase is so big that it's hard to predict what would happen with much confidence |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Strongly Disagree | 8 |
Probably slight lowering of potential output, but < 1%. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Yale | Uncertain | 1 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Princeton | Disagree | 5 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
MIT | Disagree | 5 |
Not a plausible stimulus package. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
|
Chicago | Strongly Disagree | 7 | Bio/Vote History | |
|
|
Chicago | Disagree | 3 |
Again, any effects are likely to be small. |
Bio/Vote History |
|
|
Yale | Uncertain | 6 | Bio/Vote History | |