My email exchange with Alex Tabarrok about the Seattle Minimum Wage.
On October 29 2018 I emailed economist Alex Tabarrok about his blog post at Marginal Revolution concerning the Seattle minimum wage study:
I think you need to update your post:
The Seattle Minimum Wage Study
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/06/seattle-minimum-wage-study.html
For information and links to the latest information:
What Minimum-Wage Foes Got Wrong About Seattle
https://www.bloombergquint.com/view/what-minimum-wage-foes-got-wrong-about-seattle
Although I'm guessing you'll find reasons why your original beliefs
are still correct :-).
Within 24 hours (showing he does read his email quickly) I got an email reply:
Thanks. I will check out!
Alex
After more than two months passed without any evidence via email or an online post that he did anything, I emailed him again on January 5 2019:
It's been more than 2 months since I emailed you about:
What Minimum-Wage Foes Got Wrong About Seattle
https://www.bloombergquint.com/view/what-minimum-wage-foes-got-wrong-about-seattle
in response to your post:
The Seattle Minimum Wage Study
https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/06/seattle-minimum-wage-study.html
And I cannot find any evidence online that you checked it out
as you said you would. If I missed it please let me know.
I was reminded of this when I ran across:
A non-technical guide to the dueling Seattle minimum wage studies
http://chrisauld.com/2017/07/03/a-non-technical-guide-to-the-dueling-seattle-minimum-wage-studies
which unlike your post I thought was a fair and balanced picture
by someone without an economic/philosophical/political bias.
What do you think? Will you modify your original beliefs and
if not, why not?
Unlike for my first email which he replied to quickly, there's been no response this time. And it's now been another three months and after searching the WWW I cannot find any evidence that he wants to defend himself or admit his mistake. Alex, or anyone else out there for that matter, if I am missing something please let me know. But my guess is it's just too easy and comfortable to find data that confirms ones biases and ignore data that contradicts ones beliefs.