This week’s Bad Bill is thankfully just a joint resolution, but is important to spotlight as it advocates a topic that continues to be hotly debated both here in NC and nationwide. SJR 838, sponsored by Sens. Earline Parmon (D-Forsyth) , Don Davis (D-Greene) and Angela Bryant (D-Halifax) is a resolution urging the General Assembly to consider taking up legislation to increase the state’s minimum wage.
The equivalent resolution has also been filed in the House as HJR 1068, and is sponsored by Reps. Alma Adams (D-Guilford), Pricey Harrison (D-Guilford), Rick Glazier (D-Cumberland) and Becky Carney (D-Mecklenburg).
A minimum wage law, in essence, outlaws employment. If two parties voluntarily agree to trade money for labor, they should be free from government interference to determine at what rate this exchange should take place. Limiting opportunities for exchange does not make people better off.
Simple supply and demand tells us that the higher the price of a good, the less of that good will be demanded, other things being equal. In this case, if the “price” of labor (i.e. wages) is artificially raised, there will be fewer willing buyers of labor (employers). The result: higher unemployment.
The effects of course will be felt most dramatically among low-skilled, low-income people who will be priced out of the labor market. Minorities and immigrants are hardest hit by minimum wage laws. Indeed, the first minimum wage law in the U.S., the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, was motivated by racist intentions. As pointed out by economist Walter Williams, the law “virtually eliminated blacks from federally financed construction projects when it was passed.”
Thomas Sowell also points out how the minimum wage has been used to keep minorities and immigrants from accessing jobs in several nations across the world for generations. Such a sordid history has lead Williams to label the minimum wage as “one of the most effective tools in the arsenal of racists everywhere in the world.”
Not only does the minimum wage disproportionately harm native low-skill minorities, it also harms immigrants trying to earn a living and assimilate to the culture. The city of Seattle recently approved a hike in their minimum wage to $15 an hour. In response, the “Ethnic Community Coalition” of Seattle laid out what that would mean to immigrants in the city.
“First, we would need to reduce our work force and hire only highly skilled employees. Over 10 percent of low-wage workers in Seattle do not speak English well. Right now, we hire many recent immigrants who would not likely be able to find other work in such a competitive market. At $15/hour, we would have to reduce our staff and only hire skilled, experienced workers who speak English fluently.”
Because a government-mandated minimum wage outlaws voluntary labor agreements, creates compulsory unemployment, and cruelly cuts off opportunities especially for minorities and immigrants, SJR838/HJR1068 is this week’s Bad Bill of the Week.
Oh my thank you. Thank you for the best laugh I have had in sometime. I mean really guys, Civitas is out there protecting blacks, immigrants and low skill workers. Civitas is manning the barricades protecting the oppressed … from what…. increased wages! What a hoot.
You really should have published research on how increasing the minimum wages impacts employment (it has no discernible impact) such as this one from the Center for Economic and Policy researchhttp://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/min-wage-2013-02.pdf . It took me 15 seconds to find.
What you cited for support for your argument was apples to oranges when discussing the minimum wage. The Davis-Bacon Act was not universal minimum wage. That came later under FDR. Yes the Davis-Bacon act was fraught with controversy due to its implementation which can also be easily found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis%E2%80%93Bacon_Act#Controversy
Once again through selective use of “reasearch” and suspect connection of the research to a social economic issue, Civitas publishes a false and misleading narrative. This is a dishonest treatment of a serious subject.
Unionizing is the only way NC workers will find economic justice from the greed of people like those funding Civitas Institute. Slaves had jobs but NC workers need a living wage to support their families with dignity without needing taxpayer public assistances for food, clothing and shelter.
Steve,
Maybe you should do more than 15 seconds of research on a topic before commenting on it.
Brian, you are such a funny guy.
Now that you got the joke in, how about addressing the flaws in your article that I pointed out, such as you can find no research that demonstrates that a hike in the universal minimum wage has an lasting negative impact on the economy.
…” such as you can find no research that demonstrates that a hike in the universal minimum wage has an lasting negative impact on the economy”
Hmmm, in your first comment you referenced “research on how increasing the minimum wage impacts employment.”
Now you’ve changed it to “lasting negative impact on the economy.”
You seem awfully confused.
dodge (the issue), feint, scurry, hide, parse, misread, misdirect …
so what’s next?
What issue is being “dodged”?
You need to make up your mind, as I mentioned in the last comment.
And BTW, you never directly addressed anything in my article about how the minimum wage adversely affects very specific subsets of the labor market.
Comments on articles about the minimum wage issue are always amusing.
Sadly, an incredible number of people appear to have no knowledge of basic economics, or even human nature.
Since a minimum wage increase “has no discernable impact” on employment, we should fix all of society’s problems with a minimum wage of $50/hour. Heck, why stop there? Let’s make it $100/hour, (since it doesn’t hurt employment.)
If the unskilled, entry-level worker suddenly becomes ‘worthy’ of $10/hour, what will you propose for the worker who is currently EARNING his $10/hour wage?
It would only be FAIR for him to receive a corresponding increase in pay, so everybody up the ladder of opportunity will ‘deserve’ a raise (whether or not they earn it.)
Articles about the minimum wage rarely, if ever, mention that most union labor contracts have rates pegged to the minimum wage. A 30% increase in the minimum wage will not make an employee 30% more productive. Nor will a union worker getting $45/hour suddenly be ‘worth’ $60/hour.
Small businesses, which provide much of the employment in this country, and often operate on a 3-4% profit margin, are not in business to provide jobs… they are in business to generate a profit. If you arbitrarily increase their costs they either go out of business (costing jobs) or raise their prices (counteracting the effects of higher wages.)
One cannot ignore human nature and the Laws of Economics any more than one can ignore the Law of Gravity.
A.Conservative
I see you have the good sense not to try to argue raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour or even $15.00 per hour on its own merits. To make you argument you have to add a factious number. Why should taxpayers have to support the labor force of a major extremely wealthy multination corporation such as Walmart or Yum food so the CEO can take millions more in yearly income? Let any publicly traded corporation either be unionized or pay a living wage to the work force. Remember slaves had jobs, todays works need income they can support their families on.
Lonnie Webster:
My argument would be that the free market can determine the cost and value of labor far better and more effectively than supposedly all-wise Top.Men in government, even if they seem well-intentioned.
You either misspelled ‘factious’ or don’t know what it means.
My suggestion for a $50/hour minimum wage was in response to the statement that a minimum wage ‘has no discernable impact’ on employment, a point against which you either have no rebuttal or one you have chosen to disregard.
“Why should taxpayers have to support the labor force…”
They shouldn’t. That’s the argument of the Progressives: That everyone deserves, or is owed… a ‘living wage’ or a home or medical care or a cellular phone or high-speed Internet, etc. (Where, in your opinion, would the dependency upon government ever end?)
That’s not – and should not be – the job of government. Government should enforce the law, equally and justly, providing equal opportunities, NOT equal outcomes. It is not the purpose of government to redistribute wealth, i.e. to steal the property of one person and give it to another.
“…slaves had jobs, todays [sic] works [sic] need income they can support their families on…”
How is this topic in any way related to slavery?
Perhaps a worker who cannot support a family should not have one.
Someone who wants to make more money should improve his value to the labor market, rather than demanding that government decree he is more valuable.
A. Conservative
What we’re debating here is centuries old question of economic and social justice.
The players are greed vs humanity and justice.
Conservatives have been moving American society and politics back to raw Capitalism or feudalism over the last four decades causing a decline in the American middle class with huge increases of those in grinding poverty, many working full time jobs .
The largest beneficiary of the SNAP (Food Stamps) are the Walton Family owners of Walmart. The working poor use the food stamps to purchase badly needed food for the families due to employers like Walmart under paying employees. SNAP money flows from the taxpayer to the working poor and then into the Walmart business model, with much of that taxpayer money settling in the bank accounts of the Walton family of similar wealthy capitalist.
If you want the free market to determine the value of labor, stop the fire sale on labor and give organized labor a seat at the table of American Prosperity. Let the worker share in the free market not be exploited by injustice in a rigged system of politics that gives no voice or political power the hard working wage earning Americans.
The best way to increase the value of labor in the market place is to organize and vote for political candidates who support economic justice in America.
You ask how is slavery a part of this discussion? Slaves had jobs but lived in fear, grinding poverty, had no political voice, no income, only food and shelter provided by the owner, no freedom but this was a very successful business model for the plantation owners who justified the greed. The plantation owners at least had a vested interest in the health and well-being of the plantation slaves, something the folks in a Walmart or fast food industry business model have no concern about because the taxpayers are reducing the over head of corporation’s under paid labor force.