Literally a right wing talking point that was never based in fact (just like all of them)
I know the Atlantic is ultimately a capitalist ball gargling outlet that paints itself as progressive, but c’mon
Nobody who has any knowledge of the subject expected that.
So economists
Yeah, I don’t have to rethink any assumptions that I never made in the first place…
Did anyone bother to read the article? It’s a fairly well reasoned takedown of neoliberalism with suggestion of a replacement system based on the humanistic needs of the system, treating workers as the point rather than an expense to be minimized. Yes it comes from a position of “wow isn’t this surprising” but positions it as contrast with the traditional neoliberal expectations, showing repeatedly how the opposite is true.
Very liberal use of the word “us”
It means the social circle around American politicians, which tended to really dislike the idea of paying workers more
The Atlantic series “Why you should maybe pay your serfs a bit more to get rich quicker” is always a banger.
Love to read this in between their articles on “Why Brown people are sad you’re not bombing them”, “The Perfidious
JewRussian has it’s hooks in everything”, and “We’re losing the race to beat China, but with AI we can still win”“Were”? So what’s the argument against raising the minimum wage again, now that the federal minimum is still stagnating and all the states that increased theirs are dropping behind again ?
I have to admit that what my teens are earning at part time jobs seem so much higher than what I earned as a kid …. After decades of inflation, and there’s no way an independent adult could support themselves
Edit after RTFA: I never knew anyone who thought a $15 minimum wage was crazy as an idea: everyone focussed on doubling there’s minimum wage as a crisis. The obvious solution is to schedule a regular increment so we are never faced with that again. Unfortunate reality is waiting an other decade then have everyone scream over doubling yet again.
Realistically most/all states phased it in over years, so this was never a real concern. Perhaps there’s a messaging issue here
I mean Henry Ford, 1914.
Some people quip that economics is called “the dismal science” because economists are just so bad at it.
That’s not the case in California when it increased the minimum wage of fast-food workers to $20.00/hr. From https://news.ucsc.edu/2026/03/exploring-impacts-california-minimum-wage-fast-food-workers/
“Based on what we’ve found, I think this legislation is a classic case of ‘no good deed goes unpunished,’” Owen said. “There are unintended consequences and knock-on effects, and overall, I think the results have definitely not been as positive as policymakers had been expecting.”
Maybe, but this was NOT just raising the minimum wage. This was raising the minimum wage for fast food workers of large franchises. They deliberately distorted the job market and at least some of those negatives are because of that.
The question is what goal were they intending by distorting the job market and was that achieved?
The principles of economics remain the same. The cost of doing business goes up. Consequently, employers will hire less people, reduce hours, raise prices, and automate.
