What do Republicans really think about the minimum wage? Pre-Trump, the standard story you’d get from insiders was that while Republican elites oppose the minimum wage, they have to keep their dissent secret. Why? Because the vast majority of ordinary Republicans staunchly support the minimum wage.
Isn't the best explanation just that Republicans have a distribution about how high the minimum wage should be, that is clustered around $9-10 an hour? Almost all of them favor small increases, and a majority even favor an increase to $11 over the status quo of $7, but when given a choice between $7, $11, and $15, more of them prefer $7 than either of the other two (though nearly as many prefer $11, and even one in six prefer $15).
Democrats also have a distribution of opinions about the minimum wage (about a third prefer $11 to $15, and some even prefer $7), but their distribution seems to be centered somewhere just above $15.
I suspect that if we break down the polling on the basis of party and local cost of living, that for each party, people living in high cost of living areas will be on the higher end for members of their party for what they think the federal minimum wage should be, while people living in low cost of living areas will be on the lower end of the distribution within their party. Given that Republicans tend to live in low cost of living areas, and Democrats tend to live in high cost of living areas, this shrinks the gaps between the parties even more.
The data you have presented here make me think, quite surprisingly, that there is actually very *little* remaining difference of opinion on the basis of party membership, once we factor in where a person lives. Somehow this issue has become much *less* partisan, rather than Republicans turning against it.
"What’s going on? Rising polarization is the obvious story. Mutual animosity is so strong that Republicans will oppose archetypal feel-good legislation like the minimum wage because they know that Democrats support it."
Polarization sure plays a part, but I don't think it is the main reason. What I think happens is that the "feel good" effect depends heavily on the amount of the minimum wage. At $11 workers "deserve it" (even in the Republicans mind) so a) sounds fair and b) is still far away from the amount these voters are earning themselves. $15 on the other hand sounds anti-business and is closer to what this same voters' earn. Afterall, the limit to supporting "feeling good" legislation is that the benefits to the constituency at play allows these underserved, God forbid, to catch-up with the "feeling good" voters.
One of the mysteries of minimum wage legislation is that if people believe the government can set the minimum wage with limited economic consequences, why not setting it at $1,000?
Following from this, I think it would be interesting to see the differences in polling answers if the question is framed in a different light. Something along the lines of: do you think that for teenagers, illegal immigrants and x, y ... workers, the minimum wage should be $11? or do you think that for teenagers, illegal immigrants and x, y ... workers in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi (states with a higher percent of minimum wage workers) the minimum wage should be $11? (When polling voters from out of this States)
Virtually everyone supports a very low minimum wage. It's only when the minimum wage has an impact that people may object to it. Many shrewd politicians will argue passionately for a minimum that will have no effect. As long as the minimum is well below the actual average being paid, it can be passed, have little effect, but let everyone feel good about supporting the idea.
Similarly, economists at the Federal Reserve would do little harm by adjusting interest rates to follow the actual rate being set by market forces. The problem comes when they try to force or lead the market rate. Then they cause booms and busts.
Of course they could just do nothing about these two statistics and that way they would do little harm!
However, if they did nothing, and things worked OK, it would blow their cover--Everyone would realize they're not needed!
"Regular Republicans quickly became very libertarian on Covid. The same is largely true for school choice and wokeness issues as well."
What you mean by "libertarian" in wokeness issues? I think that, in most "woke" issue, is not much clear what is supposed to be the "libertarian" position.
Isn't the best explanation just that Republicans have a distribution about how high the minimum wage should be, that is clustered around $9-10 an hour? Almost all of them favor small increases, and a majority even favor an increase to $11 over the status quo of $7, but when given a choice between $7, $11, and $15, more of them prefer $7 than either of the other two (though nearly as many prefer $11, and even one in six prefer $15).
Democrats also have a distribution of opinions about the minimum wage (about a third prefer $11 to $15, and some even prefer $7), but their distribution seems to be centered somewhere just above $15.
I suspect that if we break down the polling on the basis of party and local cost of living, that for each party, people living in high cost of living areas will be on the higher end for members of their party for what they think the federal minimum wage should be, while people living in low cost of living areas will be on the lower end of the distribution within their party. Given that Republicans tend to live in low cost of living areas, and Democrats tend to live in high cost of living areas, this shrinks the gaps between the parties even more.
The data you have presented here make me think, quite surprisingly, that there is actually very *little* remaining difference of opinion on the basis of party membership, once we factor in where a person lives. Somehow this issue has become much *less* partisan, rather than Republicans turning against it.
"What’s going on? Rising polarization is the obvious story. Mutual animosity is so strong that Republicans will oppose archetypal feel-good legislation like the minimum wage because they know that Democrats support it."
Polarization sure plays a part, but I don't think it is the main reason. What I think happens is that the "feel good" effect depends heavily on the amount of the minimum wage. At $11 workers "deserve it" (even in the Republicans mind) so a) sounds fair and b) is still far away from the amount these voters are earning themselves. $15 on the other hand sounds anti-business and is closer to what this same voters' earn. Afterall, the limit to supporting "feeling good" legislation is that the benefits to the constituency at play allows these underserved, God forbid, to catch-up with the "feeling good" voters.
One of the mysteries of minimum wage legislation is that if people believe the government can set the minimum wage with limited economic consequences, why not setting it at $1,000?
Following from this, I think it would be interesting to see the differences in polling answers if the question is framed in a different light. Something along the lines of: do you think that for teenagers, illegal immigrants and x, y ... workers, the minimum wage should be $11? or do you think that for teenagers, illegal immigrants and x, y ... workers in Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi (states with a higher percent of minimum wage workers) the minimum wage should be $11? (When polling voters from out of this States)
I am curious about the effect of the "reframing".
Virtually everyone supports a very low minimum wage. It's only when the minimum wage has an impact that people may object to it. Many shrewd politicians will argue passionately for a minimum that will have no effect. As long as the minimum is well below the actual average being paid, it can be passed, have little effect, but let everyone feel good about supporting the idea.
Similarly, economists at the Federal Reserve would do little harm by adjusting interest rates to follow the actual rate being set by market forces. The problem comes when they try to force or lead the market rate. Then they cause booms and busts.
Of course they could just do nothing about these two statistics and that way they would do little harm!
However, if they did nothing, and things worked OK, it would blow their cover--Everyone would realize they're not needed!
Opponents should start calling them "minimum skills laws" since they're just as accurately described as a ban on low-skilled employment.
Here's a thought. Does the minimum wage apply to corporations? To LLCs?
If I want to work for less than the minimum wage, can I form an LLC, and allow my LLC to be hired for whatever wage I want?
If yes, can I help others do the same?
"Regular Republicans quickly became very libertarian on Covid. The same is largely true for school choice and wokeness issues as well."
What you mean by "libertarian" in wokeness issues? I think that, in most "woke" issue, is not much clear what is supposed to be the "libertarian" position.