Male cross-dressing young man in McDonalds in Shanghai being served by minimum wage worker
Stigler on Obama
By JASON L. RILEY
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Tuesday, 30 July 13
President Obama told a crowd in Chattanooga, Tenn., Tuesday
that "because no one who works full-time in America should have to live
in poverty, I will keep making the case that we need to raise a minimum
wage that in real terms is lower than it was when Ronald Reagan took
office."
There
are many things wrong with that statement, starting with the
implication that the typical minimum-wage earner is supporting a family
of four. In fact, most minimum-wage earners are young, part-time workers
who aren't poor. According to federal data, their average family income
is more than $53,000 a year.
But
what's also striking about the president's argument is how long
proponents of the minimum wage have been making it, and how long noted
economists have been telling those proponents that it's a bad idea. Back
in 1946, George Stigler, whom Milton Friedman called "one of the great
economists of the twentieth—or any other—century," addressed Mr. Obama's
statement 67 years before the president would utter it.
"The
minimum wage provisions of the FLSA of 1938"—a reference to the Fair
Labor Standards Act, which established a national minimum wage—"have
been repealed by inflation," wrote Stigler. "Many voices are now taking
up the cry for a higher minimum." Stigler, who would win the Nobel Prize
for Economics in 1982, continued: "The popular objective of minimum
wage legislation—the elimination of extreme poverty is not seriously
debatable. The important questions are rather (1) Does such legislation
diminish poverty? and (2) Are there efficient alternatives? The answers
are, if I am not mistaken, unusually definite for questions of economic
policy. If this is so, these answers should be given. Some readers will
probably know my answers already ("no" and "yes," respectively); it is
distressing how often one can guess the answer given to an economic
question merely by knowing who asks it. But my personal answers are
unimportant; the arguments on which they rest are."
There
continue to be better alternatives to minimum-wage increases, such as
the Earned Income Tax Credit, if the goal is to help the poor. But then,
his rhetoric notwithstanding, Mr. Obama isn't pushing for a higher
minimum wage to help alleviate poverty. He's advocating it, first and
foremost, in deference to Big Labor. Unions like minimum-wages because
they price people out of the labor force, and fewer workers means higher
wages for their members. As Thomas Sowell, a student of Stigler's at
the University of Chicago, writes in "Basic Economics," "Just as
businesses seek to have government impose tariffs on imported goods that
compete with their products, so labor unions use minimum wage laws as
tariffs to force up the price of non-union labor that competes with
their members for jobs."
Mr.
Obama wants a higher minimum wage because that's what a key Democratic
special interest wants. The impact on the poor is at best a secondary
concern.
No comments:
Post a Comment