Skip to main content

Table 8 Estimated effects of living wages on probability that family is poor, prior estimates, re-estimations, and updated estimates

From: The effects of living wage laws on low-wage workers and low-income families: What do we know now?

 

1995-2001

Restricted to 79 MSAs/PMSAs, corrected living wage laws, 1995-2001

Living wage variables aggregated to CMSA level, 1995-2001

Living wage variables aggregated to CMSA level, 1995-2009

Column (3) updated, 1995-2003

 

Previous estimates, restricted trends

Restricted trends

City-specific trends

City-specific trends

City-specific trends

City-specific trends

 

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Sample mean

 

0.179

0.179

0.178

0.182

0.181

Specification 1

Log living wage, lagged 12 months

−0.035**

−0.024

−0.019

−0.045**

−0.001

−0.008

(0.013)

(0.017)

(0.016)

(0.017)

(0.009)

(0.016)

Speciification 2

Business assistance living wage laws:

Log living wage, lagged 12 months

−0.024*

−0.027

−0.041*

−0.069**

−0.024**

−0.035

(0.013)

(0.022)

(0.021)

(0.022)

(0.012)

(0.022)

Contractor-only living wage laws:

Log living wage, lagged 12 months

−0.038

−0.012

0.012

−0.003

0.017

0.021

(0.025)

(0.024)

(0.023)

(0.026)

(0.011)

(0.020)

N

142,421

115,818

115,818

117,658

308,008

157,048

  1. See notes to Table 3. The March ASEC files are used for these estimates. Poverty is defined in terms of total income. The estimates in column (1) are from Adams and Neumark (2005a, Table 5). The regressions include controls for city, year, and minimum wages. Estimates are weighted by family sample weights. ‘**’ (‘*’) superscript indicates estimate is statistically significant at five-percent (ten-percent) level. Reported standard errors are robust to nonindependence (and heteroscedasticity) within city cells (clustered by city).