How Universal Basic Income Could Change Real Estate Investing

How Universal Basic Income Could Change Real Estate Investing

Real Estate Agent · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2016 · 738 posts · 1k+ votes

The other day I was having a discussion with some associates about the upcoming Presidential Election, and one of them brought up the Democratic Candidate Andrew Young and his Universal Basic Income Plan called "The Freedom Dividend."

From his site: https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/

"Andrew would implement a Universal Basic Income, ‘the Freedom Dividend,’ of $1,000/month, $12,000 a year for every American adult over the age of 18. This is independent of one’s work status or any other factor. This would enable all Americans to pay their bills, educate themselves, start businesses, be more creative, stay healthy, relocate for work, spend time with their children, take care of loved ones, and have a real stake in the future."

While I must admit that this seems like a ploy to literally buy votes, I do think that Universal Basic Income (UBI) is an important thing to consider with automation on the horizon in the years to come. 

As a Realtor and real estate investor, I couldn't help but think how this extra $1,000/mo might affect the housing market.

INCREASED HOUSING AFFORDABILITY

The first implication of this extra $1,000/mo is that it would make housing much more affordable in most markets, potentially reducing the monthly costs by 33% or greater for most bread and butter housing markets.

A $250k home with only 5% down and a 4.5% interest rate has a PITI of roughly $1,700/mo. With the full $1,000 going towards the mortgage, this payment would basically be reduced to $700/mo, about the same if they had purchased a home for $100k at the same terms.

This is obviously a complete game changer for the housing market, allowing many people to afford homes that couldn't afford one without this plan, increasing the housing demand particularly at the lower end of the housing market.

INCREASED HOUSING DEMAND, WITHOUT INCREASED SUPPLY

At the bottom end of the market, this UBI of $1,000/month would suddenly allow many people who could not afford a home without it to suddenly purchase one. 

Using a DTI Ratio of 45%, a married couple would have an extra $900/mo (45% of $2,000/mo) to allocated to their housing expenses, allowing them to more than double their pre-approval amount in some cases.

Without UBI: Max Purchase Price = $117k at $800/mo

With UBI: Max Purchase Price = $250k at $1,710/mo (+$900/mo to take new DTI to 45%)

(Note: I'm not a lender, and surely there is more to this calculation than I am sharing here, this is merely just meant for illustrative purposes)

Further, the extra money would allow many people who already have the income and credit but no down payment to suddenly be able to save up for the down payment, creating additional buyers at the lower price ranges.

But without increasing the supply of available homes, the base floor price for housing would certainly be raised. Simple supply and demand.

MORE POTENTIAL MOVE-UP BUYERS

With more income available for housing, some buyers will be tempted to "trade up" and purchase more housing than they could normally afford. 

Suddenly you'd be able to move into that better school district or nicer neighborhood instead of settling for what you could previously afford. Thereby creating more demand in the mid-range markets as well (Under $500k in most areas).

But still, the increased demand would be felt at the bottom end of the price range where it already exists. I recently received 9 offers in the first weekend for a $150,000 home in Phoenix, and could easily see that number doubling to 20+ offers with a UBI plan for an extra $1,000/mo.

EFFECTS ON THE RENTAL MARKET

You'd likely see a similar trend in the rental market, with people moving out of their relative's house and into their own rental who couldn't afford to do so before. 

Also, you'd see renters at the lower end in not-so-nice neighborhoods suddenly move out into nicer neighborhoods that are safer with better schools.

The big question is how many landlords are going to jump ahead of this demand and automatically bump the rents a superficial amount now that everyone has an extra $1,000 every month.

QUESTION: If you were a landlord and had a 10-unit apartment building, and suddenly all your tenants are now receiving an extra $1,000/mo, how tempted would you be to raise the rent sharply for no other reason?

If that happens, you might see an even greater increase in demand for purchasing lower level housing, with tenants perceiving they're getting a bad deal in their current rental, motivating them to finally buy a home instead.

EFFECTS ON SHORT TERM RENTALS (STR)

Since short term rentals are associated with travel, which itself is somewhat of a luxury, I don't think UBI would have as much impact on the STR market.

Surely, more people that couldn't afford to travel in the past would suddenly be able to, but they may choose to spend that money elsewhere instead.

And that's the whole rub with UBI. When everyone has a larger supply of money, the demand for ALL things naturally increases. People will spend money they didn't have in the past on new non-essential items (things they only wished they could afford in the past, but suddenly now can).

LOW PRICED MARKETS BUBBLE FROM INVESTORS

With extra income every month, and a resulting increase in local housing costs, real estate investors would swamp lower priced housing market like Ohio where homes are under $100k. 

Investors who may not be able to invest locally because of the increased demand and raising of the lower home prices would look to other states where homes are already more affordable.

This could have a devastating effect on those markets who are already experiencing fierce demand in the lower price ranges from owner occupants, with an additional demand coming from out of state investors, making the housing situation worse than it was previously.

INCREASED PURCHASING POWER FOR MULTI-GENERATIONAL & EXTENDED FAMILIES

Probably the biggest opportunity for aspiring investors would be pooling the UBI funds with fellow family members to drastically increase their purchasing power.

Imagine a family of four adults: A married couple, one of their retired parents, and one child who is an adult teenager getting ready for college. Together, they would have $4,000/mo in UBI to spend every month, or $48k/year.

Which just so happens to be roughly the amount needed to put a 20% down payment on a $250k property, and be able to do this every single year.

Together they could purchase their first $250k home and owner occupy, paying the $1,350/mo PITI with the retiree's social security. The working income from the two parents could pay all other living expenses, and they could still save $4,000/mo from the UBI.

They could easily repeat this process every year, or even buy cheaper homes in other states as investments (see above). Sure, they'll run into a little trouble once they get enough loans, but if they took a break in buying from years 5-10 and focused on increasing the current properties value or accelerated loan pay-down, they could pick this strategy back up and continue to purchase property.

By the time the 18 year old teenager is 40, he'd be absolutely loaded. And this is just with a family of four. Imagine if an extended family of 10-20 people pooled their money together. They'd have $120-240k per year to invest in real estate, stocks, and other businesses.

UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME CAN'T BE UNDONE

Probably the biggest consideration with enacting a UBI program is that it can't be undone. NO ONE will vote to give themselves less money and handouts, even if it's shown that maintaining the program is unfeasible.

For example, just look at social security. Since 2010, Social Security's Cash Expenses have exceeded it's income, with the combined reserves likely to be fully depleted by 2034.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/08/18/5-facts-about-social-security/

We've known this for quite some time, yet we all are still complicit in keeping the system up and running. Millennials pay into a system they'll likely never receive the benefits from, and Boomers would start a revolution if the benefits are suddenly taken away after paying in for their entire lives. Same thing with the coming Gen X getting ready to retire.

More likely, the system will be altered to keep it afloat and kick the can down the road to future generations, by changing the benefit formulas, raising the payroll tax, or makes other changes such as raising the cap on taxable wage income.

BIGGER PROBLEMS AHEAD

But combine this with Artificial Intelligence Experts predicting as much as 45% of all jobs could be replaced by automation by 2035, and we've got a serious problem on our hands.

Serious changes are ahead, and the government only has so much "bread and circuses" (UBI being the bread) before seriously addressing the issues at hand.

For now, UBI is presented as Social Security 2.0, but instead of just the retired population too old for most work it's going to affect everyone because soon there will be very little work at all.

And with humans projected to live 3-8 years longer than previously expected by 2050, and even with just the current US adult population of 250 million over 18 (UBI recipients under Andrew's plan), that's an additional $3 trillion per year UBI would cost us BEYOND the additional $3.2 to $8.3 trillion we hadn't planned to spend with our erroneous calculations.

Further, with an annual inflation of 3%, the buying power of a dollar today will equivalent to $2.50 in 2050, begging the question if $1,000/mo will even be enough by then?

And if Andrew does win the next election and successfully implements the Freedom Dividend of $1,000/mo, what's to stop a later presidential candidate like Elizabeth Warren from running on a platform where the freedom dividend is expanded to $2,000/mo or more?

Interesting times for sure... much to consider with the big changes ahead.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1. If you received $1,000/mo in UBI, how would your family use this money to better your lives?

2. What market are you in? How do you think $1,000/mo in UBI would affect your local housing market?

3. Would you automatically increase the rent on your investment properties because your tenants are now receiving an extra $1,000/mo?

12Reply
1,289 views

Most Popular Reply

Greg ScottPro Member
Rental Property Investor · SE Michigan · Member since 2014 · 4k+ posts · 6k+ votes
7y

Hugo Chavez did something like this in Venezuela.  That worked out well, didn't it?

If this sort of thing ever passes in this country, it's time to leave.

See this reply in the discussion

197 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Rental Property Investor · Zionsville, IN · Member since 2019 · 25 posts · 10 votes
    7y

    @Wes Blackwell

    Wow Wes, I think you hit a nerve. Great discussion topic.

    So I’m not supper political, which ever side likes less government and lower taxes I’m with them.

    However, I’m kind of a Joe Rogan fan and he had Andrew Yang on not long ago and it was a pretty good conversation. If you haven’t seen it , it is definitely worth YouTubing it. If I remember correct, there would be the implementation of some sort of technology tax on businesses. Then he is banking on the added cash influx into the market helping to support the system somehow.

    Anyway...on to the questions.

    1. Being married our UDI would be 2K per month. It wouldn’t change our lives but it would give us a little more cushion. It would be nice for vacation funds.

    2. I agrees with some of Wes’s assessment of the housing market. If people used it for this it would allow them to improve their current living situation. It would help get them to the next level. Indianapolis is no different. I have a feeling prices of everything would increase.

    3. I wouldn’t jack up the price just because people are receiving an extra 1k. I do think prices would naturally increase though.

    I wonder if these funds would be protected from being garnished or if people would be able to sale their future rights for a quick lump sum.

    Say someone wants to buy a house for 100k. They go to the lender and the lender buys the next 20 years of payments for 100k. As far as the people are concerned they just got a free paid for house... This would add to the influx of fixer uppers on the market in 10-15 years when we start picking up all these trashed houses for 30K.

  • Plano, TX · Member since 2018 · 48 posts · 28 votes
    7y

    Let me see if I have this straight.

    He's going to give everyone $1,000 and in order to pay for it he is going to force price increases on everything for everyone. 

    Aside from the obvious legal red flag raised by the government targeting specific corporations with what can best be described as 'success penalties', I guess I am confused how any part of that plan makes sense.

    What happens to responsible middle class American's 401(k)s and to the people that actually planned ahead and saved and invested money when these corporations are hit with trillion dollar expenses and their stock price tanks?

  • CA · Member since 2018 · 83 posts · 44 votes
    7y

    The way to pay for Universal Basic Income (UBI) is possible, even today. @Wes Blackwell, I totally agree. 

    There are many ways to pay for UBI and it's distressing that very few people here have looked into the mechanics, and different kinds of UBI. Things like negative income taxes, pollution credits, re-directing welfare programs, taxes on the very most top income earners, VAT on financial transactions, etc. There are a lot of places. As for the comparisons to 'socialism' keep in mind that the roads and freeways we share, the fire & police departments, the military -- all of these things are nationally funded and in the past used to be private. We can agree that sharing the burden is more beneficial to society. 

    Ultimately, I and many of you here are Patriots. We love our country, we love what it has done for us and we only want to have it get better. UBI is making sense to some of us and not others. Let's keep things civil and respectful.

    As a final note, we should consider the last major redistribution of wealth during the spending of WW2 created the middle class we now know. Things like retirement, home ownership -- all of this can be attributed to government leadership. Some of this adjustment was fine tuning banking laws, some of it was major such as major shifts in incomes and job availability.

    If we have the courage of our convictions and the love of fellow patriots in our hearts, there's nothing we can't do as a great nation, the GREATEST nation to have ever existed, when we work together. <3

  • Rental Property Investor · Newport Beach, CA · Member since 2017 · 218 posts · 138 votes
    7y

    @Alvin Sylvain This is 100% correct. The global economy used to have 90% of all humans employed in physical labor on farms, agriculture etc. No longer necessary, and no one is complaining.

  • Rental Property Investor · Newport Beach, CA · Member since 2017 · 218 posts · 138 votes
    7y

    @Sean McCluskey Anyway, I’m not worried about a serious revolt because the US Govt’s 15 foot tall AI robot soldiers will be pretty intense. Should be able to handle some hungry Uber drivers... terminator, anyone?

  • Los Angeles · Member since 2018 · 464 posts · 471 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Dennis M.:

    Of coarse it won’t really be worth even discussing his policies on here because the guy literally has no chance against Donald j trump. Donald will be the next president and we needn’t debate such a fact or debate about this no name guy no one has ever heard of .

     2020 is not guaranteed, and 2024 is anybody's game.

  • Matthew Irish-JonesBusiness Member
    Real Estate Agent · Buffalo, NY · Member since 2017 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    7y
    All of the hysteria about automation wreaking the economy is just nonsense to me. It’s like saying snow plows put all of the poor snow shovelers out of work and they all were doomed to a life of poverty and disgrace. Technological advancements make the country more efficient and produce more wealth. It also allows the market to dictate where labor should go instead of government. If you are still in the horse and buggy business, you may have yourself to blame. Universal basic income = a fancy way or saying wealth distribution by the government, AKA socialism. No thank you.
    Irish Jones Realty4.947 Reviews
    View Page
  • Los Angeles · Member since 2018 · 464 posts · 471 votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Wes Blackwell:
    And let's face it... not everyone is going to be able to "learn to code" and the guy who used to be a janitor probably isn't going to be able to learn how to be an engineer.

    @Dana Whicker here reminds us how automation put 10's of thousands of elevator operators out of work.

    I don't know what all of them did with themselves, but I'll wager 6 to 18 months later, almost all of them found gainful employment elsewhere and 10 years later, none of them wanted to go back to operating elevators. Perhaps very few of them became engineers, and fewer still rose to be CEO. But most found something.

    The point is, society as a whole benefits from every new advancement in technology, despite the inevitable temporary pain. As I said earlier, it sucks to be that guy who loses his job, but he's the only one who can decide what alternatives are suitable for him; not us. Enlarging the Welfare State can not make things better for anybody. All it can do, all it ever could do, is reward people's incompetence and laziness.

    You know what happens when you reward people for something? You get more of it.

  • Investor · San Francisco, CA · Member since 2016 · 338 posts · 444 votes
    7y

    @David Lilley, I don't disagree. I think that assuming you believe that we are going to hit an automation wall as a society at the scale and speed that many technologists believe we are, though, then do you come up with a solution beforehand to soften the blow, or do you just let the things go as they go, and pick up the pieces afterwards. It's a choice that American society is probably incapable of making whether it's this or climate change or any other major hurdle coming our way, so I'm assuming we will default to the latter. 

  • Rental Property Investor · TN · Member since 2018 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    7y

    I will just answer the questions in order....

    DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

    1. If you received $1,000/mo in UBI, how would your family use this money to better your lives?

    My family would not be able to use this money at all.  I understand that the government prints its own money, but for the government to give money to everyone it will nedd to tax someone to get that money.  I have always been on the taxed end, s I would guess that to get the $1000 a month, my family would likely be taxed $4000 a month to pay for the government to process the tax nd getting the money redistributed.  I am guessing that we would, as a family loose big time and not net even a penny more.

    2. What market are you in? How do you think $1,000/mo in UBI would affect your local housing market?

    Rural Tennessee, in the triangle between Nashville, Chat. and Knox.  I would guess there would be some that may buy into the housing market just to loose the house when a major problem arose such a new roof, main plumbing line failure, etc.  Same as now, but with more buying in and loosing.  The 'rent based on income' properties will be getting more rent.  Guessing section 8 and other poverty based benefits some get will be adjusted to show less qualify so some may be buying their own food and medicine and for them housing would not change much. 

    3. Would you automatically increase the rent on your investment properties because your tenants are now receiving an extra $1,000/mo?

    It would be adjusted based on market demand, but I would guess that one could not give away the lower rent properties, and there will not be enough of the middle rent rate properties.  I would expect that those living in the lower rent properties would move up to better 'middle class' properties, and those already renting the middle class properties would possible purchase a home.  I'd expect the middle class properties to be more valuable as rentals (higher rents) or to sell, and the lower level properties to loose value as rentals (lower rent) and to sell, and those million dollar Nashville properties won't be affected.

  • Rental Property Investor · West Lafayette, IN · Member since 2012 · 40 posts · 10 votes
    7y

    @Wes Blackwell

    It will be spent on drugs, alcohol and big screen TV’s.

  • Rental Property Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2013 · 919 posts · 911 votes
    7y

    Simple response:  bread & circus.  :-(

  • Rental Property Investor · Erie, PA · Member since 2018 · 6k+ posts · 9k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Alvin Sylvain:
    Originally posted by @Dennis M.:

    Of coarse it won’t really be worth even discussing his policies on here because the guy literally has no chance against Donald j trump. Donald will be the next president and we needn’t debate such a fact or debate about this no name guy no one has ever heard of .

     2020 is not guaranteed, and 2024 is anybody's game.

    Ha okay keep believing that . Whatever helps you sleep at night  

  • Rental Property Investor · Erie, PA · Member since 2018 · 6k+ posts · 9k+ votes
    7y
    Originally posted by @Chance Thurman:

    @Wes Blackwell

    Wow Wes, I think you hit a nerve. Great discussion topic.

    So I’m not supper political, which ever side likes less government and lower taxes I’m with them.

    Welcome to the Republican Party 

  • Eastern Michigan · Member since 2018 · 81 posts · 144 votes
    7y

    Wow... just wow.... and no.  This is a terrible idea.  A free $1000 for all??? Who is going to pay for this? If everyone gets 1000 more a month then all it will do is increase inflation very quickly.  For the most part people who are very poor already get subsidized housing,  food,  medical.  why would regular people need this? 

  • Rental Property Investor · St. Petersburg, FL · Member since 2017 · 3k+ posts · 4k+ votes
    7y

    @Dennis M. In theory, but certainly not in practice.... no political party is for less government, otherwise they would leave government.

  • Specialist · Easton, PA · Member since 2018 · 1k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    7y

    What the hell happens to my child support when I’m making $12k more. Yikes, may have to shut down my business and live off the $12k.

  • Rental Property Investor · Erie, PA · Member since 2018 · 6k+ posts · 9k+ votes
    7y

    You don’t need to be an economist to understand that   Giving money to a person who thinks like a poor man will not solve his problem . In fact it may add to his misery . Financial intelligence solves problems AND makes money . Apparently this brainiac never heard the “give a man a fish he eats for a day “ theory . A sad transparent way to to pander to lower income Americans but no surprise . It reminds me of years back the Obama Biden campaign that allowed you to type In On their website how much free money you’d receive  under their leadership once they handed out the bonuses to each person . You saw how well that turned out -11 trillion added to the National deficit and far less employment during their term 

  • Member since 2019 · 1 post · 0 votes
    7y

    @Wes Blackwell

    Thinking out loud....

    If goods and services are priced based on spending (available cash & credit) then what would the effect of a “Freedom Dividend” be? Playing it out, if you could increase spending using this policy you’d have to be taxing the successful business men and women to pay for it. It wouldn’t make sense to tax the people this is intended to benefit; although we are talking politics. This is a game where to win is to be elected not serve the populous. Already based on comments, we can reasonably conclude the BiggerPockets community (aka successful business men and women) would raise rents and bid up asset prices to a new equilibrium. I suspect most industries would follow suit. The end result would be higher taxes that look like they are on the wealthy where in reality are passed through to end consumers via price increases. Typically, price increases like this might be considered inflation (more $/Credit for the same amount of goods and services). The $12,000 surplus would be short lived. Within a couple years, the surplus gets absorbed into regular spending. Taken in isolation the intent is great. Unfortunately, the application probably wouldn’t work long term in our economic system and runs counter to social standards (keeping up with the jones’).

    Thoughts?

  • Investor · San Diego, CA · Member since 2016 · 265 posts · 305 votes
    7y
    Wes Blackwell This is merely just “re-packaging” of a re-distribution plan from the upper class to the lower. The $12k / year is less meaningful (percentage-wise) to the upper class than it is to the lower class. The money has to come from somewhere... Socialism would further increase the lack of ambition in this country. Speak with someone who has escaped to the US from a socialistic country for true perspective. Most would conclude that this isn’t where we want to end up.
  • Investor · Greenville, SC · Member since 2016 · 5k+ posts · 13k+ votes
    7y

    Dis-empowering others and teaching them that someone more knowing will always step in and do difficult tasks for them teaches them to be lazy. Stunts their emotional growth. Disables their self-confidence. And blocks them from learning personal responsibility, a critical attribute for success in life. This has nothing to do with politics or wealth...it's how the brain works.

  • Real Estate Agent · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2018 · 416 posts · 396 votes
    7y

    I had this discussion with a friend of mine the other day.  Giving people an extra 1k a month will only cause an increase in spending.  The majority of the population will see it as “extra money” and spend it immediately.  Only the poor and the frugal will really benefit from this type of Bill.  

  • Real Estate Professional · Tampa, FL · Member since 2017 · 104 posts · 47 votes
    7y

    Whose money was used in the 2007-2008 TARP Bank bailout?? For all that say that they are going to leave US if we have social programs ...12 years after TARP you and I are still here! .The same people who are taking about etc didnt say much then about hard work to the banks.

    For those who think real estate or any investment in its current form is forever, We are looking at a future maybe not too distant where the number of jobs available is going to drastically reduce due to AI and tech. EVERY job is under threat, and if you think investing is the way to hedge,think again...who will be able to pay rent for them? Companies basically consider human workers as a drag because they have needs and limitations (health care,motivation, rent,sleep,hunger etc). The job scenario will change in the next 30-40 years with AI and it might redefine jobs and who are required.Yes people always need a place to live,but they just might not be able to afford much .I hope that day comes after I am dead, or if it arrives earlier..I hope I have the strength and knowledge to get up and work in the new environment.

  • Boise, ID · Member since 2017 · 50 posts · 64 votes
    7y

    I would advise people to get more educated on the CURRENT state of AI and its capabilities.

    Some of you might have watched too many Sci-Fi shows lately.

    Big advancements have been made in a short amount of time true...but to extrapolate a 50%+ unemployment rate due to AI is just plain silly. Job markets adjust and people adapt.

    We’re generations away from creating anything close to what would of sentience relative to human beings. Good day all!

  • Real Estate Investor · Springfield, MO · Member since 2017 · 1k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    7y

    I too answer the questions asked then give a few thoughts vs. getting into the fray...

    1. If you received $1,000/mo in UBI, how would your family use this money to better your lives?

    It won't make a whole lot of difference.  We're already debt free and making 3x the median income for our market.  We'd invest more in S&P 500 index funds, spend a little more, and give a little more.  But overall, $1,000 a month doesn't change our lifestyle.  Who knows?  Maybe I'd go to part-time and/or contract work vs. continuing the 40-hour a week deal.

    2. What market are you in? How do you think $1,000/mo in UBI would affect your local housing market?

    SW Missouri (Springfield).  An average 3-bed, 2 bath starter home here costs around $130,000 - $160,000, depending on the level of amenities and location.  So our housing market is already very low-price compared to many areas of the country.  However, our incomes are also lower, so my guess is $1,000+ per month per person would allow a couple people living together to afford buying a nice home, at least until the first round of homes gets gobbled up and the bidding wars ensue for the rest.  The same would hold true for rentals.  Which leads to the next question...

    3. Would you automatically increase the rent on your investment properties because your tenants are now receiving an extra $1,000/mo?

    I would do what I do today and continue to monitor the competition.  It is likely others would start raising their rents, and so I would as well.  My handyman who works for $25/hour would raise his rates, because now people can pay more.  Whenever more dollars are chasing the same amount of goods and services, the price will increase.

    My non-political take: in the short-term, poorer households would benefit with an increase of disposable income.  Overall, though, prices would increase to the point where they would be back where they started in about 2-4 years, so they would see no long-term net benefit.  That could lead to politicians demanding $2,000/month UBI or at the very least indexing COLAs to the rate of inflation, etc. 

    People paying on long-term debt with fixed rates would make out like bandits because all of a sudden they have $1000 more per month to pay back the money they borrowed, but in reality they created no added value for the system.  Holders of long-term debt instruments (i.e. Sellers who carry paper or notes) would lose because inflation would reduce the purchasing power of the money they lent. 

    Evidence?  Everyone who complains about how bread used to be $0.25 a loaf and eggs were $0.20 per dozen forgets that was when minimum wage was $2.00/hour.**  As incomes rise, prices will follow.  Economics 101.

    ** I swag'd those costs and minimum wage: don't light a fire under me if you find some website that says my numbers are off.  You get the basic point.  There is a strong correlation between increase in minimum wage and prices for basic goods and services.  Prices do continue to increase even when minimum wage is stagnant, but I believe that is from cost-side increases in other areas, not inflation of wages.  This is not an argument for or against minimum wage: simply an exposition of what happens when minimum wage increases.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.