如果产品价格不边，对每单位劳动的利润应该没什么影响吧 因为生产厂商的MP曲线位置不变 则VMP曲线不变 完全竞争情况下的劳动需求曲线不变 然后再直接在原有的劳动需求曲线上向下平移3美圆够了

楼上的同学说分情况讨论我觉得没必要 反正劳动的需求和供给曲线会去决定均衡价格 管他大还是小呢？

考虑到政府的补贴来自于税收，则这3m（m=工人数量），相当于对社会财富进行了再分配，结果社会上货币量增加，短期内造成总需求增加，物价水平上涨，此事反映在单独的消费品市场上，就是场上有了扩大生产的激励，而每个工人的边际效用也提高了，厂商可以雇用更多的工人，所以需求曲线会向外平移

I agree with lion patially.

Depending how we interpret the requirement of law, we have different answers.

If the current equilibrium wage is 10 dollar, then if the law says firms must pay a wage of 10 plus 3 out of firms' own pockets, then it effectively sets a mimimum wages of 13 dollar, but there will not be any shift of both labor demand and supply curve. Firm still hire workers applying marginal productivity of labor equals to wage. The result will be a cut in employment. If we assume initally there is no unemployment, then the new law will effectively create unemployment.

Marginal productivity increases simply because fewer workers are hired (diminishing marginal productivity). Total economic profits still equal to zero if assuming competitive product market. There will a movement along the demand curve, but no shift will occur.

边际利润 不是 经济利润

经济利润为零

但由于福利的影响 工资变高,边际利润不是会低吗?