{"id":48798,"date":"2017-10-17T20:31:00","date_gmt":"2017-10-18T00:31:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/?p=48798"},"modified":"2025-07-25T20:32:24","modified_gmt":"2025-07-26T00:32:24","slug":"october-17-2017","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/?p=48798","title":{"rendered":"October 17, 2017"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Boston Fed has published a fascinating paper by Daniel H. Cooper, Mar\u00eda Jos\u00e9 Luengo-Prado and Jonathan A. Parker titled The Local Aggregate Effects of Minimum Wage Increases<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

As part of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal government initiated a national minimum wage in 1938, which has since been raised 22 times, the latest increase in 2009 going to $7.25 per hour. State-level minimum wage increases have occurred with much greater frequency, especially quite recently, with 17 states raising minimum wages in 2016 and 19 states doing so in 2017. In total, there have been 247 changes in the minimum wage on the federal and state level between 1999 and 2014, resulting in substantial variation in current minimum wages across the United States. The policy intent behind minimum wage laws is to raise the return to employment for low-wage workers; indeed, the idea of a $15 per hour “living wage” has been growing\u2014in 2016 California and New York passed legislation to gradually raise their minimum wages to this level (Seattle enacted a similar gradual $15 per hour increase in 2014), while other states are enacting more modest multi-year raises.<\/p>\n

A voluminous empirical literature has largely found that within the range of the increases historically experienced in the United States, higher minimum wages have minimal employment effects. However, this literature has largely overlooked the fact that through general equilibrium adjustments that go beyond the labor market, the level of the minimum wage should affect prices and consumer spending. Moreover, higher minimum wages may cause fluctuations as local economic conditions adjust to the changed regulations. This paper addresses these less-studied issues by exploiting the variation in minimum wages across the United States and the fact that labor markets are defined by commuting distances. The authors compile a dataset of state-level minimum wage changes for the 1999\u20132014 period and use city-level price data from metropolitan statistical areas to measure the dynamic effects that minimum wage increases have on annual changes in city-level prices (inflation) and consumer spending.
…<\/b>
In particular, a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage is associated with an overall (all-items) inflation rate that is 8 basis points higher relative to the preceding year. This effect is not precisely estimated and is quite small, especially given that a 10 percent minimum wage increase is nearly double the average MWPC in our sample. However, the increase in inflation is not evenly distributed across all goods and services. In particular, minimum wage changes have the largest measured impact on food prices — especially food away from home (column 8). A 10 percent increase in the minimum wage leads to prices on food away from home that are about 0.3 percent higher.
…<\/b>
Consistent with our findings for prices, we find the largest, most precisely estimated effects of a minimum wage increase on food away expenditures. In particular, a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage raises nominal food away consumption by nearly 0.8 percentage point. There are also relatively large and positive, but imprecisely estimated, impact effects for nondurables, and food and beverages consumed at home. In addition, the cumulative increase in food at home consumption is precisely estimated and of similar magnitude to the impact (and cumulative) effect for food away. Consumption of services also increases slightly.
…<\/b>
In addition, the food away and food at home consumption effects are much larger than the respective food price effects, suggesting that nominal food consumption increases more than the amount that would be implied by higher prices alone. That is, consumers appear to adjust the quantity of food that they consume when the minimum wage rises, with the effect on food away from home being more immediate and the effect on food at home occurring over time.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
HIMIPref™ Preferred Indices
These values reflect the December 2008 revision of the HIMIPref™ Indices<\/strong>
Values are provisional and are finalized monthly<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Index<\/td>\nMean
Current
Yield
(at bid)<\/td>\n		Median
YTW<\/td>\n		Median
Average
Trading
Value<\/td>\n		Median
Mod Dur
(YTW)<\/td>\n		Issues<\/td>\nDay’s Perf.<\/td>\nIndex Value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ratchet<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.00<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.2025 %<\/td>\n2,422.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
FixedFloater<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.00<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.2025 %<\/td>\n4,444.3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Floater<\/td>\n3.77 %<\/td>\n3.91 %<\/td>\n36,085<\/td>\n17.63<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n0.2025 %<\/td>\n2,561.3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
OpRet<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.00<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n-0.1055 %<\/td>\n3,070.2<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
SplitShare<\/td>\n4.75 %<\/td>\n4.72 %<\/td>\n74,789<\/td>\n4.37<\/td>\n6<\/td>\n-0.1055 %<\/td>\n3,666.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Interest-Bearing<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0.00 %<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n0.00<\/td>\n0<\/td>\n-0.1055 %<\/td>\n2,860.7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Perpetual-Premium<\/td>\n5.35 %<\/td>\n1.53 %<\/td>\n61,456<\/td>\n0.21<\/td>\n17<\/td>\n0.0115 %<\/td>\n2,822.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Perpetual-Discount<\/td>\n5.34 %<\/td>\n5.30 %<\/td>\n59,902<\/td>\n14.97<\/td>\n19<\/td>\n-0.1125 %<\/td>\n2,951.5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
FixedReset<\/td>\n4.24 %<\/td>\n4.21 %<\/td>\n152,026<\/td>\n4.39<\/td>\n99<\/td>\n0.1385 %<\/td>\n2,479.3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Deemed-Retractible<\/td>\n5.07 %<\/td>\n5.57 %<\/td>\n100,750<\/td>\n6.00<\/td>\n30<\/td>\n-0.0207 %<\/td>\n2,902.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
FloatingReset<\/td>\n2.80 %<\/td>\n2.80 %<\/td>\n46,699<\/td>\n4.05<\/td>\n8<\/td>\n0.0000 %<\/td>\n2,671.6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Performance Highlights<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Issue<\/td>\nIndex<\/td>\nChange<\/td>\nNotes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.F<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n1.11 %<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2025-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 18.25
\nBid-YTW : 7.54 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.J<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n1.16 %<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2025-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 24.50
\nBid-YTW : 4.72 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.N<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n1.17 %<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2025-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 23.25
\nBid-YTW : 5.18 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
HSE.PR.A<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n2.34 %<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Limit Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2047-10-17
\nMaturity Price : 17.50
\nEvaluated at bid price : 17.50
\nBid-YTW : 4.67 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Volume Highlights<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Issue<\/td>\nIndex<\/td>\nShares
Traded<\/td>\n		Notes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RY.PR.Z<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n240,600<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Limit Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2047-10-17
\nMaturity Price : 23.19
\nEvaluated at bid price : 23.60
\nBid-YTW : 4.20 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
TD.PR.Y<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n116,600<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2022-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 24.95
\nBid-YTW : 3.47 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RY.PR.I<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n100,380<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2019-02-24
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 25.09
\nBid-YTW : 3.65 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
NA.PR.A<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n91,760<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2021-08-15
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 26.30
\nBid-YTW : 3.84 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
TD.PF.H<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n90,462<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2021-10-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 26.11
\nBid-YTW : 3.63 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BNS.PR.R<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\n60,550<\/td>\nYTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2022-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 25.00
\nBid-YTW : 3.65 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
There were 33 other index-included issues trading in excess of 10,000 shares.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Wide Spread Highlights<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Issue<\/td>\nIndex<\/td>\nQuote Data and Yield Notes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.G<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\nQuote: 24.31 – 24.92
\nSpot Rate : 0.6100
\nAverage : 0.4430<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Hard Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2025-01-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 24.31
\nBid-YTW : 4.71 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

ELF.PR.G<\/td>\nPerpetual-Discount<\/td>\nQuote: 22.16 – 22.84
\nSpot Rate : 0.6800
\nAverage : 0.5342<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Limit Maturity
\nMaturity Date\t: 2047-10-17
\nMaturity Price : 21.92
\nEvaluated at bid price : 22.16
\nBid-YTW : 5.38 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

HSE.PR.E<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\nQuote: 24.70 – 24.97
\nSpot Rate : 0.2700
\nAverage : 0.1845<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2020-03-31
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 24.70
\nBid-YTW : 5.15 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

W.PR.K<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\nQuote: 26.25 – 26.50
\nSpot Rate : 0.2500
\nAverage : 0.1854<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2021-01-15
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 26.25
\nBid-YTW : 3.64 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

W.PR.M<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\nQuote: 26.57 – 26.75
\nSpot Rate : 0.1800
\nAverage : 0.1159<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2021-10-15
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 26.57
\nBid-YTW : 3.53 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

BMO.PR.Y<\/td>\nFixedReset<\/td>\nQuote: 24.90 – 25.24
\nSpot Rate : 0.3400
\nAverage : 0.2772<\/p>\n

YTW SCENARIO
\nMaturity Type : Call
\nMaturity Date\t: 2020-08-25
\nMaturity Price : 25.00
\nEvaluated at bid price : 24.90
\nBid-YTW : 4.18 %<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Boston Fed has published a fascinating paper by Daniel H. Cooper, Mar\u00eda Jos\u00e9 Luengo-Prado and Jonathan A. Parker titled The Local Aggregate Effects of Minimum Wage Increases: As part of the Fair Labor Standards …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48798","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-market-action"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48798","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=48798"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48798\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":48799,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48798\/revisions\/48799"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=48798"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=48798"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=48798"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}