This volume seeks to go beyond the microeconomic view of wages as a cost having negative consequences on a given firm, to consider the positive macroeconomic dynamics associated with wages as a major component of aggregate demand.

WAGES are of prime importance in any advanced economy such as ours. They affect us all far more than seems evidenced in our concern about them. Everyone buys wages, in a sense, with every purchase he makes. And three-fourths of all incomes in the United States represent pay for work done in the employ of another. So nearly every one of us is on both sides of the wage exchange, in one way or another. We all know in a general way that wages have been rising for a long time in this country, but there is evidence aplenty that the economic principles which apply to wage problems are not well understood. Probably they are no better understood now than in the early thirties when measures adopted to combat the depression proved to be such colossal failures. Fearing another depression like that which followed World War I, we now seem enmeshed in chronic and progressive inflation, which Lenin once said was a sure and simple way to destroy the capitalist system. Our “prosperity” now seems to be riding on the horns of a dilemma that will surely end in the destruction of capitalism unless we can resolve this problem which in large measure is a wage problem. I shall deal with the wage problem in a manner that may seem oversimplified. Basic principles always have a way of seeming simple. Yet if they be principles, they can no more be oversimplified than can the law of gravity or the listing of chemical elements be oversimplified. What is needed in our complex society of millions of products sold by millions of business units to over a hundred million traders through billions of transactions each year is to get back to simple economic principles. These are working tools for solving problems that seem more complex than they really are. Two Roadblocks In helping another person to resolve this wage problem, it seems to me that two roadblocks to his understanding may first have to be removed. They obstruct a thorough insight into the wage problem. One roadblock is the difference between money wages and real wages, which results in serious misconceptions. In a period of inflation such as we have long been enduring, or of deflation, a comparison of money wages in two separate years tells you no more about their relative worth than would a comparison of a daily wage in the United States with that of Chile — $10 as compared with 5,000 pesos, for instance. Money wages must first be converted into real wages before we can see their patterns of change. The other roadblock has to do with the effect of unions on wages. If you were to describe an elephant to a person who has never seen one and who had never even seen a picture of one, you probably would not describe a flea and then say that an elephant doesn’t look like that. This would not be very helpful unless the person believed that an elephant looked like a flea. In the case of unions, there seems to be a firm and widespread belief about their effect on wages such that this question must be dealt with at the outset. So we shall start there. When speaking of wages and what makes them rise, the meaning will be the over-all level of wages — the general welfare, in that sense. To speak otherwise of wages, such as wage rates for one or a few persons, would involve special situations which are not the object of this discussion. A bank robber might succeed in gaining a high wage for his hour of work; a few persons, through power and special privilege, might likewise gain some short-time advantages at the expense of the others who work. But such gains of some wage earners at the expense of other wage earners are not the aim or meaning of this analysis of why wages rise.

A comprehensive review of evidence on the effect of minimum wages on employment, skills, wage and income distributions, and longer-term labor market outcomes concludes that the minimum wage is not a good policy tool.

“Rolf shows that raising the minimum wage to $15 is both just and necessary, lest the American dream of middle class prosperity turn into a nightmare” (David Cay Johnston, Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist). Combining history, economics, and commonsense political wisdom, The Fight for $15 makes a deeply informed case for a national fifteen-dollars-an-hour minimum wage as the only practical solution to reversing America’s decades-long slide toward becoming a low-wage nation. Drawing both on new scholarship and on his extensive practical experiences organizing workers and grappling with inequality across the United States, David Rolf, president of SEIU 775—which waged the successful Seattle campaign for a fifteen dollar minimum wage—offers an accessible explanation of “middle out” economics, an emerging popular economic theory that suggests that the origins of prosperity in capitalist economies lie with workers and consumers, not investors and employers. A blueprint for a different and hopeful American future, The Fight for $15 offers concrete tools, ideas, and inspiration for anyone interested in real change in our lifetimes. “The author’s plainspoken approach and stellar scholarship illuminate in-depth discussions about the deliberate policy decisions that began to decimate the middle class at the start of the 1980s as well as the insidious new ways in which big business continues to attack American workers today via stagnant wages, rampant subcontracting, unpredictable scheduling, and other detrimental practices associated with the so-called ‘share economy.’” —Kirkus Reviews “David Rolf has become the most successful advocate for raising wages in the twenty-first century.” —Andy Stern, senior fellow at Columbia University’s Richard Paul Richman Center for Business, Law, and Public Policy

As the United States emerges from the Great Recession, concern is rising nationally over the issues of income inequality, stagnation of workers' wages, and especially the struggles of lower-skilled workers at the -bottom end of the wage scale. While Washington deliberates legislation raising the minimum wage, a number of major American employers—for example, Aetna and Walmart—have begun to voluntarily raise the pay of their own lowest-paid employees. In this collection of essays, economists from the Peterson Institute for International Economics analyze the potential benefits and costs of widespread wage increases, if adopted by a range of US private employers. They make this assessment for the workers, the companies, and for the US economy as a whole, including such an initiative's effects on national competitiveness. These economists conclude that raising the pay of many of the lowest-paid US private-sector workers would not only reduce income inequality but also boost overall productivity growth, with likely minimal effect on employment in the current financial context. "It is possible to profit from paying your employees well…and increasing lower-paid workers' wages is the way forward for the United States," argues Adam S. Posen in his lead essay (reprinted from theFinancial Times). Justin Wolfers and Jan Zilinsky argue that higher wages can encourage low-paid workers to be more productive and loyal to their employers and coworkers, reducing costly job turnover and the need for supervision and training of new workers. Tomas Hellebrandt estimates that if all large private sector corporations in the United States outside of sectors that intensively use low-skilled labor increased wages of their low-paid workers to $16 per hour, the pay of 6.2 percent of the $110 million private-sector workers in the United States would increase on average by 38.6 percent. The direct cost to employers would be $51 billion, only around 0.3 percent of GDP. Jacob Kirkegaard and Tyler Moran explore the experience of employers in other advanced countries, with its implications for international competitiveness, and Michael Jarand assesses the impact of a wage increase on the near-term development of the US macroeconomy. Data disclosure: The data underlying the figures in this analysis are available for download in links listed below.

Raise the Floor shows why so many hardworking Americans can't make ends meet.

Politicians, journalists, and the public have expressed rising concern about the decline—or percieved decline—in middle-class jobs. The U.S. work force is viewed as increasingly divided between a prosperous minority that enjoys ever-rising wages and a less affluent majority that struggles harder each year to make ends meet. To determine whether and why this view of the job market is accurate, labor market economists anaylze trends in the distribution of jobs and wages over the past two decades and attempt to forecast the future course of American earnings inequality. McKinley L. Blackburn, David E. Bloom, and Richard B. Freeman assess the reasons behind the deterioration of earnings and job opportunities among less skilled men. They consider the impact of changes in industrial structure, declines in unionization, and trends in the level and quality of schooling for men who have limited skills and education. Gary Burtless examines the effect of the business cycle, within and across different regions of the United States, on earnings inequality and analyzes the effects of demographic change on inequality over the past twenty years. Rebecca M. Blank studies the rise of part-time employment and its impact on wages, fringe benefits, and the quality of jobs. Linda Dachter Loury focuses on the effect of the baby boom and baby bust on demand for schooling among new labor market entrants. If young entrants are discouraged from seeking college training by the high cost or low payoff of schooling, the long-term impact will be a gradual decline in the skills of the U.S. work force. Robert Mofitt analyzes the effect of welfare state programs on the growth of low-wage jobs, and the extent to which the welfare reforms of the eighties have affected low-income workers.