Fighting The Tide Of The "Living Wage"
An article in U.S. News & World Report reported, with the rather Lefty-flattering title of “Vote Democratic, Earn More” that Democrats appear to be rallying around the minimum wage issue as perhaps their best seller for the 2006 election. After failing with taxes, national security, Social Security, “corruption” and a campaign centered not around solutions to real problems, but around attacks against the current administration, Democrats have gone back to the well, drank deep and found minimum wage.
After not having been raised in over a decade, the minimum wage issue is felt by many in the Leftist Democrat caucus to be an issue that will finally again resonate with enough Americans to swing their vote. It usually takes this long between raising it as it takes a while for people to forget the damage that was caused the last time the minimum wage was raised. A true Marxist invention, federal and state minimum wage laws violate one of the basic tenets of the employer-employee relationship, namely “What will you work for?” By establishing a bottom end, jobs are artificially restricted and costs are artificially raised on jobs that most people consider temporary or entry-level, not careers.
To think it only affects those at that end of the economic spectrum is a bit naïve as well. Businesses forced to restructure their bottom line as they must pay their least-skilled or needed workers more will seek to put those costs elsewhere. Whether it’s higher prices to we the consumers or just fewer skilled jobs near the top, well, that’s the price we pay for social engineering.
The notion of a minimum wage is very thoughtful, but there is no evidence that it provides any economic benefit to anyone but the people who are getting the extra money. Everyone else touched by it is hurt economically. So, with that in mind, which is worth more?
Then there's the matter of just how many people will see a wage increase. Probably one of the most authoritative economists on this and many such subjects, Walter Williams, wrote a column this week on this very subject. He puts into perspective the massive voting block we're discussing here.
The U.S. Department of Labor reports: "According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2004, some 73.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.8 percent of all wage and salary workers. Of those paid by the hour, 520,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15." (http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm#2)
There’s also the matter of job worth. Is getting the fries up equivalent to a secretary’s job or an office clerk or a phone support specialist? Should we pay an unskilled worker, a high school student, or an immigrant looking for his first job in the workforce the same as people who might have more education or experience, but who are entering the lower end of a skilled field? If so, what message are we sending? That being uneducated and not willing to put effort into getting a better job are the new American values? That it is no longer “American” in nature to want to excel to earn better wages?
And what is a fair “minimum” wage? This is another argument that we’ve had since the idea was first put into law. If you establish a minimum wage, what is the motivation? Is it to let someone make enough to own their own home? Own their own car? Keep a room at the local flophouse? Where do you draw the line? I’ll tell you where. You draw it just high enough that it does people who are getting it no real good, while at the same time leaving you room to whine for an even higher wage to keep the issue fresh and politically viable. This is, as with so many issues on the Left, just bad comedy. That Democrats assume people actually should believe that raising the minimum wage will somehow relieve poverty and usher in some golden age of wealth for the lower class by forcing employers to pay artificially high wages for work that isn’t worth it, is almost as sad as outfits like U.S. News & World Report shilling that issue for them and trying to add credibility to it.
Voting for Democrats won’t get you any more money, unless you’re one of those privileged few who will get an appointment to some patronage position in Washington. It will get you higher taxes, reduced economic productivity, and an entrenched class of workers who now have a lot less incentive to advance from these low-end jobs. Minimum wage is not the Democrat’s only agenda. It’s the tip of a Big Government Iceberg both parties seem intent on steering us towards. The big difference seems to be that the Democrats want to increase speed as well.
An article in U.S. News & World Report reported, with the rather Lefty-flattering title of “Vote Democratic, Earn More” that Democrats appear to be rallying around the minimum wage issue as perhaps their best seller for the 2006 election. After failing with taxes, national security, Social Security, “corruption” and a campaign centered not around solutions to real problems, but around attacks against the current administration, Democrats have gone back to the well, drank deep and found minimum wage.
After not having been raised in over a decade, the minimum wage issue is felt by many in the Leftist Democrat caucus to be an issue that will finally again resonate with enough Americans to swing their vote. It usually takes this long between raising it as it takes a while for people to forget the damage that was caused the last time the minimum wage was raised. A true Marxist invention, federal and state minimum wage laws violate one of the basic tenets of the employer-employee relationship, namely “What will you work for?” By establishing a bottom end, jobs are artificially restricted and costs are artificially raised on jobs that most people consider temporary or entry-level, not careers.
To think it only affects those at that end of the economic spectrum is a bit naïve as well. Businesses forced to restructure their bottom line as they must pay their least-skilled or needed workers more will seek to put those costs elsewhere. Whether it’s higher prices to we the consumers or just fewer skilled jobs near the top, well, that’s the price we pay for social engineering.
The notion of a minimum wage is very thoughtful, but there is no evidence that it provides any economic benefit to anyone but the people who are getting the extra money. Everyone else touched by it is hurt economically. So, with that in mind, which is worth more?
Then there's the matter of just how many people will see a wage increase. Probably one of the most authoritative economists on this and many such subjects, Walter Williams, wrote a column this week on this very subject. He puts into perspective the massive voting block we're discussing here.
The U.S. Department of Labor reports: "According to Current Population Survey estimates for 2004, some 73.9 million American workers were paid at hourly rates, representing 59.8 percent of all wage and salary workers. Of those paid by the hour, 520,000 were reported as earning exactly $5.15." (http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2004.htm#2)
There’s also the matter of job worth. Is getting the fries up equivalent to a secretary’s job or an office clerk or a phone support specialist? Should we pay an unskilled worker, a high school student, or an immigrant looking for his first job in the workforce the same as people who might have more education or experience, but who are entering the lower end of a skilled field? If so, what message are we sending? That being uneducated and not willing to put effort into getting a better job are the new American values? That it is no longer “American” in nature to want to excel to earn better wages?
And what is a fair “minimum” wage? This is another argument that we’ve had since the idea was first put into law. If you establish a minimum wage, what is the motivation? Is it to let someone make enough to own their own home? Own their own car? Keep a room at the local flophouse? Where do you draw the line? I’ll tell you where. You draw it just high enough that it does people who are getting it no real good, while at the same time leaving you room to whine for an even higher wage to keep the issue fresh and politically viable. This is, as with so many issues on the Left, just bad comedy. That Democrats assume people actually should believe that raising the minimum wage will somehow relieve poverty and usher in some golden age of wealth for the lower class by forcing employers to pay artificially high wages for work that isn’t worth it, is almost as sad as outfits like U.S. News & World Report shilling that issue for them and trying to add credibility to it.
Voting for Democrats won’t get you any more money, unless you’re one of those privileged few who will get an appointment to some patronage position in Washington. It will get you higher taxes, reduced economic productivity, and an entrenched class of workers who now have a lot less incentive to advance from these low-end jobs. Minimum wage is not the Democrat’s only agenda. It’s the tip of a Big Government Iceberg both parties seem intent on steering us towards. The big difference seems to be that the Democrats want to increase speed as well.
posted by Rob Beck | 5:10 AM
1 Comments:
It is my understanding that some union contracts are tied to the minimum wage as well (some percentage or dollar amount higher than the current federal minimum). So I also believe this to be a ploy to throw a bone to unions.
Note that I have not seen this confirmed in writing, so it may just be idle Internet speculation.
Post a Comment
<< Home