Minimum Wage Should Be Abolished in the United States

I would first like to respond to the following statement you made: "In a Country that does not have a Minimum wage, employees are forced to work at employer rates, in countries with some minimum wage they aren't." In a country that does not have minimum wage, there are three reasons why employers have the control (or rather, why people are willing to work for wages as low as they are): (1) the GDP per capita in that country is far lower, and therefore, the impoverished people are willing to work for much less, (2) these countries usually have relatively, if not blatantly oppressive regimes that will punish workers who refuse to work, and (3) the lack of anti-trust laws and business regulation diminishes competitiveness . In the few nations that don't have minimum wage, but that don't meet either of these two conditions, there are almost always alternatives put in place, such as collective bargaining agreements (whether or not these alternatives are productive is another issue). I would also like to reinforce your understanding of what I meant when I said "by supporting minimum wage, you're assuming that employers have all the control." I could be wrong, but based on your response, you seem to have misunderstood what I said. In other words, you seem to think that I meant that minimum wage laws GIVE the employer all the control. Let me be more specific: by supporting minimum wage laws, you're assuming that employers have all the control when such laws are not legislated. But as I've stated, the GDP in this country is high enough that nobody is going to work for 2 cents an hour. In your fourth paragraph, you point out the fact that if Americans aren't willing to work for next to nothing, then people in other countries will. Keep in mind that it is only the manufacturing jobs that get outsourced; any jobs in the service industry must remain here. And as you obviously understand, minimum wage CAUSES outsourcing of industrial jobs, so in order for your argument to remain consistent, whether or not minimum wage laws are in place has virtually no effect on whether or not these jobs get outsourced. However, you also need to consider the cost of importing goods made outside the country; the benefit employers get from hiring third world citizens who are willing to work for virtually nothing is negated by these costs. Hiring employees at home is much cheaper, and therefore employers can afford to hire employees at higher wages, while still earning more profit than they would had they outsourced these jobs. Because of all this, the assertion you made in your sixth paragraph, the one about how prices have already bottomed out because of outsourcing, is not really a sustainable argument. The argument becomes even more unsustainable when the following is considered: even under minimum wage, you'll frequently find that employers and employees DO, in fact, negotiate wages, even in relatively low-level jobs, and employees will earn wages that are quite a bit above minimum wage. This is because employers have decided that they can afford to make a compromise with their employees that is most suitable for both their interests. What makes abolishing minimum wage even more plausible is the fact that there's a much better alternative, one that still provides a guaranteed income, yet has virtually none of the negative side effects of minimum wage: it's called the negative income tax. Here's how it works: the negative income tax involves a yearly fixed government payment granted to any working or disabled individual, and is used in conjunction with a flat tax rate. So suppose you had a fixed government payment of $10,000 dollars a year, and there was a flat tax rate of 25%. A person making $40,000 a year would break even; they would pay no taxes, nor would they earn any money, because their fixed government payment would be equal to the percentage lost after taxes (i.e. 25% of $40,000 equals $10,000, which, in this scenario, is equal to the fixed government payment involved). A person who hypothetically makes only $0.40 a year would still end up with near the $10,000 of the government payment. The $10,000 payment is only slightly less than what would be earned under a minimum wage of roughly $5.00 an hour, yet would be worth quite a bit more, because inflation would no longer be an issue. What's also great about the negative income tax is that it can essentially pay for itself, because it would eliminate the need for social security, welfare, food stamps, and of course, minimum wage. And ultimately, outsourcing would no longer be a problem.