Redneck Review
No.50 4/4/2016
Hey! Just this week the Lewiston Tribune posted an article claiming California passed a minimum wage law that would slowly go into affect over the next couple of years, raising their current minimum to $15/hour when fully implemented.
Also this past week we read that the Obama administration and key Democratic officials running for office are also calling for substantial increases in the nation's minimum wage!
Dare it be said that it is high time that a little common sense be resorted to here! Readers are encouraged to respond here, and detect any serious flaws in the following arguments!
In last week's article, it was maintained that an employer should be the one who decides what a potential employee is worth. It is a recognizable FACT that many new employees are offered positions at wage scales far above the minimum wage! Again, it is a FACT that colleges claim that a degree will substantially raise a person's income, hinting that training in areas of current importance make a person more employable! No argument!
Also maintained last week was that no employer on a local level should be forced to hire someone at a wage scale that the applicant is not worth! Again in fact, it is pretty well assumed that the one who hires is free to make that decision, and is not subject to force, though admittedly some programs coming from federal levels like Affirmative Action have and sometimes still do force hiring some employees! So, unless a person at any level is forced by law to hire a non-productive applicant, forcing a minimum wage and/or raising it can and does have one predictable result: The non-productive at that wage level are left unemployed, and marginal workers under the old wage become unemployed under the higher wage! Easily available statistics show this! Unemployment increases!
So the conclusion should be, that hiring decisions be left to the person who does the hiring, and not be left in the hands of political entities at any level of government!
Also, at what level should a minimum wage be set? Even at the current state and national highs of $10/hr, a person working five 8-hour days would earn only around $19,200 a year, and even a mandatory raise to $15/hour would pay only $28,800/year, both figures putting the recipient below the official poverty line at about $30,000 for a family with two children. So, if you are going to raise it, why not go to $20/hour, meaning that the annual income now would be $38000/year, a far more reasonable amount removing the family out of "poverty." Why not? Unreasonable and out of the question one hears! But that prompts the simple question, just what is reasonable, and why would the same objection not hold for even a simple 10 cents/hour raise - if the potential employee is not worth it?
And another thing... argument #2 in fact. Americans seem to be comfortable with auction sales of coveted items to a highest bidder after a bidding contest! Why then would this not be equally acceptable? Consider a job opening in which five applicants come before the employer, each hoping for the job. No minimum wage requirement exists, and their is only one position available. All other things being equal, would not the employer feel compelled to give the job to the applicant who seems most desperate, and continues to say he would work for a lower wage, essentially auctioning down the rate, until all others not so desperate, walk away? Really, is the employer not morally bound to hire the most desperate individual? (Concluding remarks on this issue next week!)
Jake Wren
 

Home

Classified Ads