I don’t think it invalidates the claim that “Without the minimum wage law, lots of people would probably be paid significantly less.” (I believe that’s one of the claims you were referring to. Let me know if I misinterpreted your post.)
I don’t have a whole lot of time to research economies around the world, but I checked out a couple sources with varying perspectives (two struck me as neutral, two as libertarian). One of the libertarian ones made no effort to understand or explain the phenomenon, but all three others agreed that these countries rely on strong unions to keep wages up.
IMO, that means you’re both partially right. As you said, some countries can and do function without minimum wages—it’s clearly possible. But as the original poster said, if a country has minimum wage laws, removing those laws will in fact tend to reduce wages.
Some countries without minimum wages still have well-paid workers. Other countries without minimum wages have sweatshops. I think that market forces push towards the “sweatshop” end of the scale (for the reasons described by the original poster), and unions are one of the biggest things pushing back.
“if a country has minimum wage laws, removing those laws will in fact tend to reduce wages.”
You say so, but you don’t justify that statement in any way. When the poster wrote: “Without the minimum wage law, lots of people would probably be paid significantly less.”
I assumed they meant that the lack of MWL would push to sweatshop like conditions, my observation proves that it is not ture. The reverse (MWL pushes away from sweatshop like conditions) can also be proven false, as there are plenty of countries with bad economies and MWL where people live in miserable conditions.
I don’t think it invalidates the claim that “Without the minimum wage law, lots of people would probably be paid significantly less.” (I believe that’s one of the claims you were referring to. Let me know if I misinterpreted your post.)
I don’t have a whole lot of time to research economies around the world, but I checked out a couple sources with varying perspectives (two struck me as neutral, two as libertarian). One of the libertarian ones made no effort to understand or explain the phenomenon, but all three others agreed that these countries rely on strong unions to keep wages up.
IMO, that means you’re both partially right. As you said, some countries can and do function without minimum wages—it’s clearly possible. But as the original poster said, if a country has minimum wage laws, removing those laws will in fact tend to reduce wages.
Some countries without minimum wages still have well-paid workers. Other countries without minimum wages have sweatshops. I think that market forces push towards the “sweatshop” end of the scale (for the reasons described by the original poster), and unions are one of the biggest things pushing back.
I’m curious if you have independent reasons for thinking that market forces push towards sweatshop-like relations. It’s not obvious to me either way.
“if a country has minimum wage laws, removing those laws will in fact tend to reduce wages.”
You say so, but you don’t justify that statement in any way. When the poster wrote: “Without the minimum wage law, lots of people would probably be paid significantly less.”
I assumed they meant that the lack of MWL would push to sweatshop like conditions, my observation proves that it is not ture. The reverse (MWL pushes away from sweatshop like conditions) can also be proven false, as there are plenty of countries with bad economies and MWL where people live in miserable conditions.