Robert Reich writes:
"The nation could create millions of jobs tomorrow if we eliminated the minimum wage altogether and allowed employers to pay workers $1 an hour or less. But do we really want to do that?"
That’s quite an admission. Most lefties (that I read, at least) won’t admit that abolishing the minimum wage would unleash an environment where a wave of job creation could take place.
But first thing’s first….
"The nation" would not create millions of jobs. This imagery of a thing called “the nation” that thinks and acts like a human individual is a complete fiction. Only real and authentic individual human beings, who are also business owners and entrepreneurs, would be the people creating the jobs.
"The nation" would remain in the fantasy-entertaining minds of people like Reich.
Next, abolishing the minimum wage would create jobs at every price level ($9, $8, $7…all the way down until everyone who desires a job is employed. Markets clear.
Could someone be paid $1/hr? I don’t know, and neither does Reich. Is it possible that some will be employed for $1/hr? Of course it’s possible, but the two parties to the contract obviously don’t have an issue with it, and no one is ever forced to make a contract.
If someone does not want to accept a $1/hr job (that’s at least available) they have the option of either upgrading their skills or staying out of the labor market. The alternative (i.e., having a minimum wage that is higher than $1/hr.) guarantees that this person will be forced into unemployment.
Remember, the only thing that the minimum wage accomplishes is to outlawall jobs that could be performed for less than the government’s arbitrary minimum. It creates nothing.
Finally, the Grand Finale…
Reich says, “But do we really want to do that?” That is, do we really want a free market where supply and demand match up buyers & sellers of labor.
If by “we,” Reich means the two parties of each and every employment contract…YES!!…They do really want that! Otherwise they would have avoided entering the contract.
However, let’s remember that Reich’s mental construction of our world consists of the fictional “nation.” When he says “we,” he means no one in particular. Does he mean the author of this article? Am I included in that “we”? He doesn’t want to know my view, which is that no one has the right to force themselves into anyone else’s business. I don’t care if two people make a contract for 2 peanuts per hour! It’s their business, not mine.
Reich surely means ‘The Overseers’ when he uses the word “we”. And I’m sure he considers himself as one of those privileged ‘Overseers’. For it is “they” who must decide what is best for every unique individual.
Sadly, too many people have fallen under the spell of their fantasy.