Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
11 things you should know about the minimum wage
11 things you should know about the minimum wage
May 11, 2025 10:33 PM

As is ing mon New Year’s theme, the minimum wage increased on Monday in more than a dozen states across the U.S. According to the Economic Policy Institute, 18 states increased the lowest legal wage allowed:

• Alaska: $9.84, $.04 increase

• Arizona: $10.50, $.50 increase

• California: $11.00, $.50 increase

• Colorado: $10.20, $.90 increase

• Florida: $8.25, $.15 increase

• Hawaii: $10.10, $.85 increase

• Maine: $10.00, $1.00 increase

• Michigan: $9.25, $.35 increase

• Minnesota: $9.65, $.15 increase

• Missouri: $7.85, $.15 increase

• Montana: $8.30, $.15 increase

• New Jersey: $8.60, $.16 increase

• New York: $10.40, $.70 increase

• Ohio: $8.30, $.15 increase

• Rhode Island: $10.10, $.50 increase

• South Dakota: $8.85, $.20 increase

• Vermont: $10.50, $.50 increase

• Washington: $11.50, $.50 increase

Out of the 19 states that raised minimum wages last year, 16 raised them again in 2018 (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, South Dakota, Vermont, and Washington).

Will the increases help pull people out of poverty? Do they increase unemployment? Although the debate about this issue as raged since 1938, when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt introduced the first federal minimum wage, few Americans truly understand whether wage floors help or hurt workers.

To help you better understand the issue, here are ten other points you should know about minimum wage laws:

1. Both sides of the debate believe they are arguing in defense of the poor. Most people who support or oppose minimum wage laws and/or increases share mon objective — helping the working poor. Because both sides have noble intentions, the merits of the debate over minimum wage laws and minimum wage increases should be based on empirical evidence that it will actually help, rather than harm, the poor.

2. Economists disagree about the effects of small increases in minimum wages. It’s true that economists disagree about the effects of the minimum wage on employment and the living standards of minimum wage earners. But almost all of the disagreement is about relatively small increases (less than 20 percent). Almost all economist agree that significant increases to the minimum wage or attempts to bring it in line with a “living wage” (e.g., $12-15 an hour) would lead to significant increases in unemployment. Even some liberal economists warn that increasing the wage to $15 an hour would harm employment.

3. The primary argument for minimum wage increase is that it increases the value of the worker’s labor. — The efficiency wage theory of labor holds that higher real wages improve labor productivity by reducing worker turnover and the associated costs of hiring and training new workers, by reducing the incentive for workers to unionize, and by increasing the opportunity cost of being fired — thereby giving the worker incentive to be more productive. Under this view, small increases to the minimum wage will have no deleterious employment effects.

The assumption is that paying higher wages increases worker satisfaction, thus reducing turnover. This is a reasonable assumption only if there is a price disparity between similar jobs. Given a choice between working at American Eagle for $7.25 an hour and at the Gap for $10, most would prefer to fold sweaters for the higher wage. They will even be willing to work harder (thus increasing their labor value) to appeal to an employer paying the higher wage.But if every store in the mall (and every other job in the area) is required to pay $10 an hour, then the decision to switch jobs will be based mainly on non-monetary factors.

But there is another element that is often overlooked in discussions about minimum wage increases. Because of the labor price differential, Gap can be more choosy about who they hire; their willingness to voluntarily pay a higher minimum pay gives them an advantage over other employers since they’ll have more applicants to choose from. Unless their store managers are petent, Gap will only be hiring people whose labor is truly valued at $10 a hour. In other words, they will be getting what they are willing to pay for.

That is why conservatives claim government-mandated negates the effects of the efficiency theory and can kill jobs. Not only will businesses that were willing to pay more lose their advantage in hiring, those not willing to pay more will fire/not hire people whose labor is valued at less than $10 an hour. Once minimum wages are raised, turnover rates also increase as people decide to stick with or leave a job based on other factors. And the people who will never be hired (e.g., low-skilled workers, new immigrants) are shut out of the labor pletely.

4. The primary argument against minimum wage increases is that it discriminates against those who have low-skills. Milton Friedman once described the minimum wage as a requirement that “employers must discriminate against people who have low skills.” As Anthony Davies explains, “the minimum wage prevents some of the least skilled, least educated, and least experienced workers from participating in the labor market because it discourages employers from taking a chance by hiring them. In other words, pete for jobs on the basis of education, skill, experience, and price. Of these factors, the only one on which the lesser-educated, lesser-skilled, and lesser-experienced worker pete is price.”

5. The minimum wage redistributes wealth from the low-skilled poor to the more skilled working poor and middle class. Many supporters of minimum wage increases mistakenly believe that increases in wage rates are transfers of wealth from employers and investors to the workers. But as Anthony Davis explains, the money to pay for the increased wage e from at least one of four places: higher prices for consumers, lower returns to investors, lower prices to suppliers, or a reduced work-force. Empirical research has shown that the primary effect of minimum wage increases is reduced employment, which essentially transfers the wealth (in unearned wages) from the less skilled to the more skilled working poor and middle-class teenagers.

6. The most frequently cited empirical research in favor of minimum wages increases was proven wrong. — The most famous empirical study in favor of the minimum wage is David Card and Alan B. Krueger’s 1994 study of New Jersey’s minimum wage hike of 1992. Their study found that the increase in the minimum wage had no negative effect on employment—in fact, it had a slightly positive effect (though it also found that prices at fast-food restaurants increased). The main criticism of the research was that they did not measure actual employment data, but only surveyed store managers by telephone, asking whether the managers had hired or fired, or intended to hire or fire, workers following the increase in the minimum wage. However, two follow-up studies that looked at the actual payroll data found that the increase in the minimum wage in New Jersey led to a decline in employment in the fast-food industry — the opposite effect claimed by Card and Krueger’s study. (Note:InNew York Times op-edlast fall, Krueger wrote that “a $15-an-hour national minimum wage would put us in uncharted waters, and risk undesirable and unintended consequences.”)

7. Minimum wage increases disproportionality affect African Americans. Employment among African American males between the ages of 16 and 24 is disproportionately responsive to the minimum wage. A ten percent increase in the minimum wage would reduce employment by 2.5 percent for white males between the ages of 16 and 24, 1.2 percent for Hispanic males between the ages of 16 and 24, and 6.5 percent for African American males between the ages of 16 and 24. Professors Even and Macpherson estimate that in “the 21 states fully affected by the federal minimum wage increases in 2007, 2008, and 2009,” young African Americans lost more jobs as a result of minimum wage hikes than as a result of the macroeconomic consequences of the recession.

8. Few people actually earn a minimum wage. Workers earning $7.25 per hour represent only 4.7 percent of the nation’s 75.3 million hourly-paid workers and 2.8 percent of all workers.

(Source: Mercatus Institute)9. The typical minimum wage worker is a white teenage girl who works part-time. The majority of minimum wage earners are young (50.6 percent are ages 16 to 24) and almost 1 in 4 are teenagers (24 percent are ages 16 to 19). 44 percent are in food-preparation and serving-related occupations; 15 percent are in sales and related occupations, and the rest are scattered.

10. Historically, minimum wage laws have been used to discourage immigration and oppress the poor and minorities. A minimum wage was seen to operate eugenically through two channels: by deterring prospective immigrants and also by removing from employment the “unemployable.” As Thomas C. Leonard explains, progressive economists in the early 1900s believed that “the job loss induced by minimum wages was a social benefit, as it performed the eugenic service ridding the labor force of the ‘unemployable.’” More recently, businessman and political activist Ron Unz has argued that increases in minimum wages are necessary to reduce both legal and illegal immigration. As Unz says, “Critics of a rise in the minimum wage argue that jobs would be destroyed, and in some cases they are probably correct. But many of those threatened jobs are exactly the ones that should have no place in an affluent, developed society like the United States, which should not attempt pete with Mexico or India in low-wage industries.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Will Chicago Mandate the “Everyday Low Price” too?
Chicago’s City Council passed a measure last week that mandates “big box” stores such as Wal-Mart, Best Buy and Lowe’s to pay workers — regardless of experience — a minimum wage of $13 an hour including benefits by 2010. See the opinion piece in today’s Wall Street Journal. The justification is to help poor people have a better standard of living. Is this another example of good intentions mixed with bad economics? This time I doubt the intentions are to...
‘We get Viagra. They get malaria.’
At least, the title of this post is typical of the mantra against the practices of drug panies, according to Peter W. Huber’s “Of Pills and Profits: In Defense of Big Pharma,” in Commentary magazine (HT: Arts & Letters Daily). Huber, a senior fellow of the Manhattan Institute, summarizes in brief the pany argument, and then goes on to examine what truth there is in such claims. He says of the difference between creating and administering drugs, “Getting drug policy...
Gambling Hypocrisy
“All forms of gambling are predatory and immoral in their very essence,” says Rev. Albert Mohler. I don’t agree, at least insofar as his identification of what makes gambling essentially immoral is not necessarily unique to games of chance: the enticement for people to “risk their money for the vain hope of financial gain.” Stock e to mind. Indeed, as I’ve pointed out before, there is no single coherent Christian position regarding gambling per se. For example, the Catechism of...
On Blogging
G. K. Chesterton on Journalists: “…there exists in the modern world, perhaps for the first time in history, a class of people whose interest is not in that things should happen well or happen badly, should happen successfully or happen unsuccessfully, should happen to the advantage of this party or the advantage of that party, but whose interest simply is that things should happen. “It is the one great weakness of journalism as a picture of our modern existence, that...
Yeah, Ohio!
Ohio Court Limits Eminent Domain ...
Sin and Extreme Sports
You may know that a traditional way of interpreting the Ten Commandments involves articulating both the explicit negative prohibitions as well as the implicit positive duties. So, for example, the mandment prohibiting murder is understood in the Heidelberg Catechism to answer the question, “Is it enough then that we do not kill our neighbor in any such way?” by saying, “No. By condemning envy, hatred, and anger God tells us to love our neighbors as ourselves, to be patient, peace-loving,...
Krauthammer on Proportionality
“‘Disproportionate’ in What Moral Universe?” asks Charles Krauthammer in today’s Washington Post. He continues: When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to cinders, and turned the Japanese home islands into rubble and ruin. Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal...
Coulter on Christianity and the Welfare State
In this Beliefnet interview conducted by Charlotte Allen, conservative firebrand Ann Coulter references the work of Acton senior fellow Marvin Olasky: Is it possible to be a good Christian and sincerely believe, as Jim Wallis does, that a bigger welfare state and higher taxes to fund it is the best way in plex modern society for us to fulfill our Gospel obligation to help the poor? It’s possible, but not likely. Confiscatory taxation enforced by threat of imprisonment is “stealing,”...
‘The Aryan clause, the Confessing Church, and the ecumenical movement’
The latest issue of the Scottish Journal of Theology is out, and includes my article, “The Aryan clause, the Confessing Church, and the ecumenical movement: Barth and Bonhoeffer on natural theology, 1933–1935.” Here’s the abstract: In this article I argue that the essential relationship between Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth stands in need of reassessment. This argument is based on a survey of literature dealing with Bonhoeffer and Barth in three basic areas between the critically important years of 1933...
Isn’t the Cold War Over?
I’ve got an idea for a new . Titled, Hugo and Vladi, it details the zany adventures of two world leaders, one of whom (played by David Hyde Pierce) struggles to upkeep his image of a friendly, modern European diplomat while his goofball brother-in-law (played by George Lopez) keeps screwing it up for him by spouting off vitriolic Soviet rhetoric and threatening all of Western civilization with his agressive (but loveable) arms sales and seizures of private panies. It is...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved