$15 Minimum Wage

(1) Poverty is an issue that will always exist within a Capitalist society. Poverty is a healthy sign of a market at its work. Income inequality is inevitable. However, I should note that Robert Reich is not a respective Capitalist; instead, he shares more Socialistic values. Therefore, he does not account for the concept of economic competition; that is to say, between businesses and individuals competing, a marketplace will foster an environment where the benevolent race one another to assure the best conditions and services in exchange for maximum profits. An article by Pew Research describes that twenty-nine states [including D.C] have wages above the federal minimum. What does this mean? States where the minimum is higher will draw citizens across state lines, and there will be competition between the states. However, that is because the current wage is feasible. Imagine states trying to raise above the 15 minimum. I should mention also that the federal minimum wage does not account for differing state economies. While California may be able to afford a higher minimum, who's to say Ohio can? Or Pennsylvania? Or Michigan? Another problem this comes down to is a precedence with regard to state versus federal power. If the federal government controls the economics of each state, that may be a slippery-slope leading to other jurisdiction and rule over the states and their autonomy. If the worker of a company has two kids, and they are being paid inadequately, they simply quit and find an employer with better benefits and pay. Those companies exist in an economic market with minimal regulations; as opposed to markets with high regulation, wage hikes, and litigation against small businesses that put small, private sector entrepreneurs out of work. Now, take this article from the LA Times. A woman is describing the difficulty of living off of $7.25, which I agree is inadequate. However, her issue could be fixed if employers started paying above the minimum for her labor. The way she can attain that standard of employment is if she works to build a stronger resume, and aims for an above corporate minimum pay job. (2) This point is really moot/I am unable to refute it, considering the entire premise of my argument. (3) Sure, the minimum wage being raised by the federal government may increase consumer spending, but it will also cause businesses to spike prices. Effectively, what has changed? Your paycheck will look bigger, but you would end up draining your pockets trying to buy pockets were previously far cheaper. In order for smaller companies to pay the $15 minimum, they would have to compensate for it by racking in more profits. The way to do that? Make prices go up. Supply and demand. ------------------------ The larger image here can easily be covered if you only examine the consequences of wage hikes throughout the country on private sector growth. Several businesses on the West Coast have been put out of work due to sharp state government mandates in pay rates. Owners had to raise employees' hours and lay workers off before inevitably going out of business due to the non-affordable expense of a $15 minimum. And again, as I stated in a previous round, Walmart lobbied for this wage for that very reason. Even then, corporate America does not want to pay these wages. Ever wondered why Wendy's has begun to use machines instead of humans at their locations? In fact, several of them? It is because as wages have increased, the desire for human workers has generally decreased. Just as with affirmative action and the welfare state, high wage hikes hinder those they are purported to help. Sources Cited (1) http://www.pewresearch.org... http://www.latimes.com... Larger Image: http://ijr.com... http://www.facesof15.com... http://www.ronpaullibertyreport.com... http://fusion.net...