Who Sets the Minimum Wage? - Liberty.me

Who Sets the Minimum Wage?

Tags: Economics law Minimum Wage

Joe Cobb November 14, 2015 at 3:07 pm

http://joecobb.com/2015/11/14/who-sets-the-minimum-wage/

The idea that a government should create a law telling employers, or potential employers, they are forbidden to pay anyone less than a certain floor price for labor will find itself creating an artificial surplus of labor at the lower supply-curve range. Elementary price theory, long known to be valid.

But what is “magical” about a Federal law? What is more logical about a local law? And what is most logical is letting each employer decide for his establishment what the starting or minimum (disliked) wage should be, as workers would want to increase it by more quality and effort.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Martin Nicholls November 14, 2015 at 4:12 pm

“The idea of government being able to impose relative valuations of human effort is tyranny.”
Ralph Harris: Former Director General of the IEA.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
  
  Joe Cobb November 14, 2015 at 4:55 pm
  
  Tyranny is the arbitrary use of force by someone “in authority” to force a property owner to behave differently from what the property owner would prefer to do. This applies also to any unemployed, lower-skilled person, who wants an opening and a trial period on a job. If they work out for the employer, it is clearly tyranny for anyone outside these two people to impose some Law. What would be the function of such a “Law”? We can suppose it just gratifies the ego of those who passed the law, without regard for the consequences.
  
  You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- - You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Frank Maruschak November 14, 2015 at 6:03 pm

“Private” Contract (LAW) OVER RULES all other Laws, Codes, or rules, so the catch is that a “Corporation” (Artificial Entity) must get “Permission” for doing business in a State or with the Federal Government because that “Corporation is the Creation of the State. I think that a State or the Feds would have a hard time “forcing” a minimum wage on a man and his hired-hand(s) because the key is in the choice of WORDS and construction of the LANGUAGE. Any time a “State” or the “Federal” Government wants to “regulate” something “they” first make you think that some Law that they “passed” makes an activity “Illegal” so that you must get a License “to” do whatever they just made illegal. We suffer from our own ignorance because we don’t know the limits on the “authority” of our government. the “Law Makers” Create “Special Definitions” for words that most people know and use in common conversation, however when used within the Language of the Law those same words have special meaning. The words: Income, wages, employee, employer, includes, State, and United States all have special meanings when used within the Statutes and Codes for the regulation of a “Trade” or Business which create the illusion that you are engaged in some kind of privileged activity. We are know as a Nation of Laws, yet we get little training or education on the “LAW”.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
  
  Joe Cobb November 14, 2015 at 6:12 pm
  
  Absolutely correct, and the “belief” among the social Democrats is funny, that passing a Law will change anything – except perhaps for those (corporations) who choose to be most risk-averse. If passing a Law could change human behavior, the issues with drugs and guns would not be discussed.
  
  I would regard it as “prudent anarchy” to hire someone and pay them without telling the governments.
  
  You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- - You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Frank Maruschak November 14, 2015 at 10:03 pm

A carefully worded “correct” contract for doing of work is the opposite of anarchy. The completion of the contract is the true, correct, and certain fulfillment of the terms of the contract by the will of the individual-parties in the contract. The roll of the government is the seeing that nothing interferes with the performance of the terms of the contract. The only problem is that the government has forgotten it’s duty.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
  
  Joe Cobb November 14, 2015 at 10:30 pm
  
  I agree that it is social order, and thus not “anarchy” in the sense of chaotic. But it is not following the rules of IRS and Labor Departments, nor of ICE and e-verify mandates, which social conservatives seem to lust for (tattoo my number on my forearm).
  
  You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
  
  Joe Cobb November 14, 2015 at 10:32 pm
  
  I cannot imagine a government agency and civil service employees having any sense of duty other than to due diligence, minimally, and to preserving their pension rights. The lessons of the Public Choice School of economists is well worth remembering when analyzing how government “fails” in its “duty.” (I love the gun-rights slogan, “When seconds count, the 911 police response is only minutes away.”)
  
  You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
- - You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Frank Maruschak November 15, 2015 at 6:01 pm

The alphabet agencies described above are a more recent eruption of the corruption in government, however we can not place all of the “blame” on the government, even though “it” has acquired a momentum of it’s own, because “we” still elect it. I think this point illustrates the heart of the problem. How much “opt in” or “opt out” by each individual is “necessary” for a functioning “social-organization”? Can any “social-organization” continue functioning without true, correct, and certain communications between the members?

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Viewing 3 reply threads