Absurd argument
Watching Walter Block and Boyd Blundell debate unions and the minimum wage Blundell made the most absurd argument:
He accepted Block’s reasoning that demonstrated that the minimum wage causes unemployment, but then proceeded to argue that removing the minimum wage is a bad thing. Block made the point that removing the minimum wage means more money to the least skilled (and therefore poorest), this was countered by Blundell saying that this is bad because it means the poorest have to work when they could be doing other things.
Just a minute. He expects me to work hard, spending lots of time at work therefore denying me the opportunity to do other more fun things, so that my money can be given to people to allow them to not work? I think I see a problem with the incentives here.
I don’t mind providing some support for those who are struggling to make ends meet. I’d prefer that to be transparent and ideally voluntary and to be going towards supporting those few who cannot work and those who are working but still find it difficult to earn money.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
July 11th, 2007 at 8:49 am
He presumably means that with falls in hourly wages due to the minimum wage, the working poor would have to work very long hours in order to make a reasonable living.
Without the minimum wage, “those few who are still working but still find it difficult to earn money” would not be so few.
July 11th, 2007 at 9:47 am
Which would be reasonable, but the situation described was of someone working /and/ receiving welfare, so the hours worked would not need to come into it.
July 12th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Thanks for the link to this; I had no idea the video was online.
Only your characterization is absurd. If someone works for $3/hr, they could work full time and make about $480/month, gross. You can’t some close to living on that in New Orleans, so you work another 20 hours. Now it’s 720 month. If it’s a single mother with tow children (not uncommon at all), she still a) can’t come close to supporting her family, and b) will never see her family.
Interesting that you interpreted my “other things” (spending time with one’s family, cooking healthy food instead of ordering fast food, going to medical/dental appointments, taking classes to improve earning potential) as other “more fun” things. Think it through, and you might not be so cavalier about consigning so many people to the hellish life of a 19th century wage slave.