why not?


the IF is highly leading,, because it is not necessary to raise prices automatically because of the wage

it is dependent upon many factors,,,,,including the porofits already being seen and demand amongst other things


this debate will always exist , until someone shows the definitive correlation between increased wages requiring increased consumer prices (or increased consumer prices requiring increased wages)


professionals and economists will be on both sides of the issue for years to come

Someone has, Milton Friedman did years ago.

Mmm yes. However, Milton Friedman was not in charge of what capitalism is, nor was he the be all end all economist of all time. No one has been.

The reason why there are different "schools" of economics, is because there are a number of different viewpoints about it, and almost all of them have proven to be both true and false, in that though societies have bumbled along under one set of ideas or another for a while, and things went well, sooner or later something happened which made a mess.

And then there's the most common error made by amateurs who read little bits of a given economists ideas and think they know everything:

everything is different in a CLOSED system or a purely LOCALIZED system, from an OPEN system, or a WORLDWIDE system.

Friedman was an economist with common sense. Something we could all use more of. Common sense that is.

Krugman/Picketty-Gailbrath-Fan,hmm?

Oops,forgot Keynes,Lord of the Statists!

http://fee.org/articles/will-raising-the-minimum-wage-lift-full-time-workers-out-of-poverty/

http://fee.org/articles/seattles-minimum-wage-hike-didnt-help-low-wage-workers/