The Hidden Cost of Low-Wage Jobs

If you've been watching the news, you've seen reference to a report that says low-wage workers are subsidized by taxpayers, and that Wal-Mart workers are subsidized more than average. The report is at this URL:

a UC Berkeley study about the costs of low-wage jobs

Read more for more info.

A week ago, I was sent a link to an AP article that linked to
a UC Berkeley study about the costs of low-wage jobs. In short, low wage workers are subsidized by taxes to pay for public services, and Wal-Mart workers are subsidized more than the average low-wage retail job.

(link to the report)

If other retailers lower their compensation to compete with Wal-Mart, the effect will be magnified.

Within the report, there is an important fact presented. The number of retail jobs isn't substantially increased or decreased when Wal-Mart enters a market. Wal-Mart only displaces jobs.

(The "new jobs" they claim they will create will come from declining business at other stores. The number of jobs in retail is limited by the demand in the economy, not by companies that start businesses.)

Retailers, in general, use more public resources because they pay so poorly. Because Wal-Mart pays less than other retailers, they use around 40% more public resources than other retailers.