I have written about the link between wages and obesity before—with wages dropping since the 60s and healthy food prices always going up, people eat more unhealthy food. But now two economists have drilled down into these issues and claim to have found a specific link between a drop in the minimum wage and obesity:
Growing consumption of increasingly less expensive food, and especially “fast food”, has been cited as a potential cause of increasing rate of obesity in the United States over the past several decades. Because the real minimum wage in the United States has declined by as much as half over 1968-2007 and because minimum wage labor is a major contributor to the cost of food away from home we hypothesized that changes in the minimum wage would be associated with changes in bodyweight over this period. To examine this, we use data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System from 1984-2006 to test whether variation in the real minimum wage was associated with changes in body mass index (BMI). We also examine whether this association varied by gender, education, and income, and used quantile regression to test whether the association varied over the BMI distribution. We also estimate the fraction of the increase in BMI since 1970 attributable to minimum wage declines. We find that a $1 decrease in the real minimum wage was associated with a 0.06 increase in BMI. This relationship was significant across gender and income groups and largest among the highest percentiles of the BMI distribution. Real minimum wage decreases can explain 10 percent of the change in BMI since 1970.
Photo courtesy Vanessa Pike-Russell via Flickr Fast food companies have a long history of fighting things like unionization drives and minimum wage increases—indeed, they are often leading the charge. It’s clearly been good for their bottom lines and now this study shows how it’s been bad for our waistlines. The study authors focused on food eaten outside the home since labor costs are a significant component of total costs for fast food (unlike for processed foods) and such food has been a significant source of additional calories in our diets.
Anyway, one interesting component of the study was that the BMI effect regarding the minimum wage were more pronounced among high income earners rather than among low income earners. The study’s authors speculate that this is because low income earners don’t eat nearly as much food outside the home. The authors also found something interesting in that regard:
[E]ven though lower income persons are more likely than higher income persons to be obese, obesity has increased most among higher income persons in recent years, as might be expected if changes in the price of food away from home were driving increases in obesity.
In other words, the more you make, the more calories you’re getting from fast food, which has in turn gotten cheaper thanks to a falling real minimum wage which has thus caused you to eat even more fast food. Your vicious circle is McDonald’s virtuous one.
Keep in mind, the minimum wage effect is relatively small, only 10 percent of the overall increase in obesity since 1970. Unfortunately, the authors also point out that simply raising the minimum wage can’t necessarily be considered an obesity “cure” since other productivity improvements among fast food companies, especially in recent years, may dilute the minimum wage’s impact going forward.
Still, it’s worth marveling at the fact that the minimum wage was—measured in 2007 dollars—$9.15 in 1968 and dropped to around $5.80 in 2007, so perhaps a few more raises are in order. If you’re wondering why a living wage went the way of the Princess Phone, just ask McDonald’s.
h/t Free Exchange

Comments
View as Flat
Delay And Deny Posted 5:38 pm
11 Nov 2009
Soooo...you're saying what?
I don't understand this article and I got 750 on the reading part of the SATs. Somehow a minimum wage job makes you eat fast food, which makes you fat, but rich people are eating fast food and they're fat too?!?
Here's something that does interest me though...fast food is no longer cheap! To get one of the supersized meals "with all the amenities" can sometimes end up costing 6 or 7 dollars.
Well, I just went to my favorit Thai place for lunch and had a heaping plate of Jungle Fried Rice for $7. See, it's all about choices.
I've actually been seeing food prices at my local Top Food come crashing down...for meats in some cases by half. I cook a lot at home, and you can make lots per person for way less than even fast food per person. In fact, one of my problems is I'm a good cook and live alone, so I end up eating 3 or 4 portions and could lose a few pounds...however, it's all "good cholesterol"...right?
Permalink
stern_matt Posted 12:54 pm
12 Nov 2009
It isn't always about choices. In many low-income communities across the US, the only option is fast food. Cheap or expensive, healthier food options are not available. As for cooking at home, supermarkets are also absent.
In addition, many folks work multiple jobs just to put food on the table. For them (unlike myself who has time to write comments on blogs) time is extremely limited. Cooking isn't always an option and, again, when it comes time to eat out fast food is the only option.
Certainly personal decisions are also in the mix but for many the choice between 'healthy' and fast food isn't equivalent in regards to time and accessibility.
Permalink
Carey Posted 9:44 am
15 Nov 2009
I think you underscore some important things like time and choice which are undoubtedly limited in certain areas. I don't think we get very far blaming fast food, however. Yes, personal decisions matter and although I do believe citizens can become more deliberative and responsible in making decisions, I am also aware of the challenges in doing so given the unique circumstances of an individual's life, health and work.
This article and comments reminds me of the documentary PBS created on inequality and sickness where nothing about fast food was reported. Instead, for example, they discussed how the Pima and Tohono Oodham Indians of southern Arizona have arguably the highest rates of Type 2 diabetes in the world. Even though the disease was virtually unknown in this area a century ago, the subsequent diversion of river water destroyed farms and traditional ways, plunging local tribes into poverty and dependence. A sense of futurelessness took hold and diabetes did as well. In 2004 the Pima finally won back their water rights and are beginning to farm again. Community leaders are cautiously optimistic that community empowerment and sustainable and culturally appropriate development can restore prosperity, hope, and health. This to me, would be a step in the right direction in regards the relationship between social responsibility and health and economic outcomes.
Permalink