What arguments can be used against the minimum wage intrusion of govt.

November 9, 2006

[HEY4QDEMS]

Name me one union, I've worked in the carpenters, the electrical workers, and the teamsters unions and we never had such terms in our contract.

I call BS.

[backhoe]

I penned this for our friends at Free Dominion:

Connie wrote:
I don't believe in a minimum wage.


Connie is correct- in 1987, in a rare bit of sanity, the New York Times published and editorial titled

"The Correct Minimum Wage = 0"

I owned an operated retail and service businesses here for decades, so let me tell you a secret- I didn't pay my employees...

...my customers did. That is Y-O-U...

Same as they did all the taxes, and all the regulatory fees imposed by "the caring classes."

And there's a darker side to mandating any kind of an extra cost upon any business.

Most have what I call marginal employees- they are worth paying a little, but not paying much more... Worth $5.00 an hour? Maybe, because they do show up and go away when you want them to.

Worth $10.00 an hour? Better to let them go, and give the savings to the better people. They'll be grateful.

Link:
http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=832890&highlight=#832890

[HEY4QDEMS]

You missed the point!

I got your point but I still only view it as a theory.

I've never heard of anyone pressuring their boss for a raise because they are no longer making X amount of dollars above the minimum. I understand the logic behind it, I just never seen it in practice.

[BenLurkin]

Well, there is always the whole Constitution thing....

[DaveTesla]

I have 300+ employees.
How many do you have?

[Rippin]

Many economists believe the effect will be negligible, both on the economy as a whole and in helping the poor.

---

When minimum wage is below the market wage for entry level jobs this is true. It obviously depends on how high it is raised. But most economists still predict that whatever the negative impact may be in aggregate, it disproportionately will be felt by the more disadvantaged areas (poor teens etc.)

http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba292.html

[HEY4QDEMS]

No employees.

Four subordinates (Although I hate the term)

[HEY4QDEMS]

Are they pressuring you to close the wage gap when the new minimum goes into effect, or are they waiting for their regularly scheduled review?

[MotleyGirl70]

Where is the grammar Nazi when you need him.

[malia]

your are correct - it will mean loss of jobs, higher prices, and the only winner will be....

the Federal and State governments.

[Rippin]

Lets say an employee works hard doing something pretty demanding for $10 per hour. Let's say the minimum wage is $6. Now lets suppose (Not a stretch) that your $10 employee can find a minimum wage job with more flexible hours, less stress and closer to home.

The employee will realize working for $10 is effectively a 67% raise over working for minimum. Now if minimum is raised to $8 his $67% premium just got cut to 25%. Is it still worth to to work harder for the extra $2 per hr.? The answer is different for each employee and they won't ask for anything. They'll just resign one day. Too many of those and you have to raise your wage scale.

Its called the market.

[wolfcreek]

1) By increasing minimum wage, you offer increased incentives to employers to hire illegals to do the work for the same low rate.


I don't know about elsewhere but, in Texas, I doubt there are any illegals working for min. wage. They've figured out how to get more money. Some are actually making fairly good money because they get no benefits. We got smart illegals here in Texas.

[SkiKnee]

Business does not exist to provide workers with jobs, or health care benefits or paid vacations, etc., etc., etc. Business exists to provide goods and services to consumers and industry at a fair price and make a profit. Minimum wage laws interfere with employers and employees ability to honestly and contractually agree to compensation for services rendered.
An employee has skills and abilities that he markets to employers. Any compensation he receives for those skills belongs to him and him alone. No one has the right to demand that employees are entitled to an arbitrary compensation for those skills. It should be left to the employer and employee to negotiate that between themselves.

[supercat]

Well the old it will cause unemployment argument is dated and well a myth (unless it is raised to something like $9 an hour or something like that).

The only way a minimum wage law can increase anyone's income, aside from artificial pegs (e.g. union contracts that specify that a person gets X times minimum wage) is by eliminating from the workforce those who would be unable to demand more. Eliminating those workers from the workforce is likely to boost the pre-tax income of those who remain, but since those people will then have to be supported by the welfare state, the net effect is detrimental to everyone (except those who profit from the welfare state, of course).

[spikeytx86]

Not true, depending on the size of the increase the business could absorb it through reduced profits. The business could also reduce work hours or limit hiring. It would have to be a sizable increase to actually eliminate someone. Again, I am not advocating the MW increase, just saying that the unemployment response is usually overrated. It has to be a sizable and sudden increase to induce unemployment.

[supercat]

Suppose there were a law that mandated a $50 minimum wage for people born on a Sunday. Workers born on other days of the week would be exempt.

Ignoring for a moment the constitutional issues, do you think there would be more:

1. Workers born on a Monday through Saturday, who would try to falsify their birth papers so they could demand $50/hour, or
2. Workers born on a Sunday who would try to falsify their fith papers so they could accept a job that paid less than $50/hour?

A logical response to this argument would be the "it only works if everyone does it" argument. I would posit that 99.9% of the time that argument is made, the person making it is admitting that people won't accept a policy unless forced. And that admission in turn suggests that the person pushing the policy is an enemy of freedom.