this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2025
231 points (94.9% liked)

memes

18267 readers
2203 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Human nature isn't it?

I chuckled when I realized I'd seen an academic study cited as gospel truth about supporting the world with only a third of current resources just after a post where everyone ignored the academic studies saying a proposed wealth tax would lower revenues etc.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

May as well reveal your interpretation of the 30 studies at this point. Not that you're wrong so far, more curious.

[โ€“] Acamon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

My conclusion was that raising minimum wage gave people more money to spend (obvs), and although it could be linked to some increase in inflation, that that cost was borne over the wider economy, so those on MW still saw an meaningful increase in real terms spending power. The evidence for MW rises causing unemployment were mixed, but meta-regression analysis showed that there was significant publication bias in MW studies (preferring those that showed MW raised unemployment) and once that was accounted for, MW was neutral on unemployment. Apart, perhaps for a small effect on teenagers.

But it was a few years back that I had to look in to that, and the studies themselves are often focussed on data from decades earlier. And that's the problem with a lot of economic research claims, while it is helpful to examine historical patterns and learn from them, it isn't easy to isolate the confounding factors and get to some general law. I feel it's closer to history than physics (despite the aspirations of some economists), you can learn from the past, but current society will be different in significant ways that might make things play out quite differently.